P"^ 


a  0-4 

77/i-g:|/WM^ 


e^. 


BOOK    204.H229   c.  1 

HARNACK    #    WHAT    IS    CHRISTIANITY 


3  T1.S3  DDObSODD  M 


v 


/^i/It^ 


K.^- 


K^       t/  t'^ 


P,KA 


f 
•/U^ 


c/yCrt'l'U 


/ 


Authorised  American  Edition 
Reprinted  from  the 

Theological  Translation  Library 


? 


What  is  Christianity  r 


Lectures  Delivered  in  the    University  of  Berlin 

during  the  Winter-Term 

1899-1900 


By 

Adolf  Harnack 

Rector  of,  and  Professor  of  Church  History  in,  the  University,  and 
Member  of  the  Royal  Prussian  Academy,  Berlin 


Translated  into  E7iglhh 
By 

Thomas  Bailey  Saunders 

SECOND  EDITION,  REVISED 


New  York 
G.  P.  Putnam's  Sons 

London  :  Williams  and  Norgate 
1903 


Copyright,  1901 


BY 


G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 

Set  up,  electrotyped,  and  printed  December,  1901. 
Reprinted  March,  1902. 


Ubc  Iftnicherbocfter  press,  'ftew  JgorJ? 


AUTHORS  PREFACE  TO   THE  ENGLISH 
EDITION 

To  meet  the  wishes  of  my  English  friends  I  have 
assented  to  the  ptiblication  of  these  Lectures  in  English 
as  well  as  in  German^  and  as  my  esteemed  frie7id 
Mr.  Bailey  Saimders  ivas  so  selfdejiying  and  obliging 
as  to  undertake  the  translation  of  them,  I  was  sure 
of  their  being  in  the  best  hands.  Whether  there  is  as 
great  a  need  in  England  as  there  is  in  Germany  for  a 
short  arid plaiji  statement  of  the  Gospel  and  its  history, 
I  do  not  know.  But  this  I  know :  the  theologians  of 
every  country  only  half  discharge  their  duties  if  they 
think  it  enough  to  treat  of  the  Gospel  in  the  recondite 
language  of  learning  and  bury  it  in  scholarly  folios. 

A.HARNACK. 
Berlin,  October,  igoo. 


TRANSLATOR'S  PREFACE 

The  following  Lectures  were  delivered  exte7npore  to 
a  class  of  some  six  hundred  students  drawn  from  all 
the  Faculties  in  the  University  of  Berlin.  An  enthusi- 
astic listener  took  them  down  in  shorthand,  and  at 
the  close  surprised  Professor  Harnack  with  a  complete 
report  of  what  he  had  said.  A  few  alterations 
sufficed  to  transform  the  Lectures  into  a  book,  a7id 
German  readers  everywhere  were  thus  happily  enabled 
to  share  in  some  of  the  privileges  of  the  original 
audierice. 

I  deem  it  an  honour  to  have  any  hand  in  offering  to 
my  fellow-countrymen  a  similar  advantage.  Goethe, 
writing  in  his  last  years  to  Carlyle,  described  traJts- 
lators,  in  grandiloquent  language,  as  the  agents  of 
intellectual  com^nerce  among  the  nations.  The  duty 
of  such  agency  in  regard  to  the  contents  of  this  volume 
I  have  done  my  humble  best  to  discharge,  convinced  as 
I  ant  that  i7i  the  traffic  in  ideas  between  Germany  and 
the  English-speaking  peoples  all  over  the  world  both 
the  matter  of  Professor  Harnack' s  discourse  and  tJie 
spirit  in  which  he  treats  it  are  alike  worthy  of 
attention. 

T.  BAILEV  SAUNDERS. 

London,  November,  igoo. 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

General  Scope  of  the  Lectures      .        .        .  i 

I.  THE  GOSPEL  :  Preliminary          .         .         .  lo 

(i.)  The  Leading  Features  of  Jesus'  Message  21 

The  kingdom  of  God  and  its  coming        .  56 
God  the  Father  and  the  infinite  value  of 

the  human  soul      .         .         .         .         .  6S 
The  higher  righteousness  and  the  com- 
mandment of  love          ....  76 


(ii.)  The    Gospel    in    Relation    to    Certain 

Problems   .......       84 

The  Gospel  and  the  world,  or  the  ques- 
tion of  asceticism  .....       85 

The  Gospel  and  the  poor,  or  the  social 
question  ......       95 

The  Gospel  and  law,  or  the  question  of 
public  order no 

The  Gospel  and  work,  or  the  question  of 
civilisation     .         .         .         .         .         .126 

The  Gospel  and  the  Son  of  God,  or  the 
Christological  question  .  .         .      133 

The  Gospel  and  doctrine,  or  the  question 
of  creed 157 


viii  Contents 

PAGE 

11.  THE  GOSPEL  IN  HISTORY  : 

The  Christian  Religion  (i.)  in  the  Apos- 
tolic Age     .     164 

"  "  "        (ii.)  IN  ITS  Devel- 

opment  INTO 
Catholicism     204 

«  «<  "       (iii.)  in    Greek 

Catholicism     233 

«<  "  "       (iv.)  In      Roman 

Catholicism     263 

«<  *«  "        (v.)  In    Protest- 

antism .     287 


What  is  Christianity 


WHAT  IS  CHRISTIANITY? 


LECTURE    I 

THE   great    English    philosopher,    John    Stuart 
Mill,  has  somewhere  observed  that  mankind 
annot  be  too  often  reminded  that  there  was  once 
a  man  of  the  name  of  Socrates.     That  is  true ;  but 
still  more  important  is  it  to  remind  mankind  again 
"nd  again  that  a  man  of  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ 
ace  stood  in  their  midst.     The  fact,  of  course,  has 
een  brought  home  to  us  from  our  youth  up;  but 
nhappily  it  cannot  be  said  that  public  instruction 
1  our  time  is  calculated  to  keep  the  image  of  Jesus 
i'hrist  before  us  in  any  impressive  way,  and  make  it 
an  inalienable  possession  after  our  school-days  are 
over  and  for  our  whole  life.     And  although  no  one 
who  has  once  absorbed  a  ray  of  Christ's  light  can 
ever  again  become  as  though  he  had  never  heard  of 
him ;  although  at  the  bottom  of  every  soul  that  has 
been  once  touched  an  impression  remains,  a  con- 
fused recollection  of  this  kind,  which  is  often  only  a 
**superstitio,"    is  not  enough  to  give  strength  and 

I 


2  What  is  Christianity  ? 

life.  But  where  the  demand  for  further  and  more 
trustworthy  knowledge  about  him  arises,  and  a  man 
wants  positive  information  as  to  who  Jesus  Christ 
was,  and  as  to  the  real  purport  of  his  message,  he 
no  sooner  asks  for  it  than  he  finds  himself,  if  he 
consults  the  literature  of  the  day,  surrounded  by 
a  clatter  of  contradictory  voices.  He  hears  some 
people  maintaining  that  primitive  Christianity  was 
closely  akin  to  Buddhism,  and  he  is  accordingly  told 
that  it  is  in  fleeing  the  world  and  in  pessimism  that 
the  sublime  character  of  this  religion  and  its  pro- 
found meaning  are  revealed.  Others,  on  the  con- 
trary, assure  him  that  Christianity  is  an  optimistic 
religion,  and  that  it  must  be  thought  of  simply  and 
solely  as  a  higher  phase  of  Judaism  ;  and  these  peo- 
ple also  suppose  that  in  saying  this  they  have  said 
something  very  profound.  Others,  again,  maintain 
the  opposite ;  they  assert  that  the  Gospel  did  away 
with  Judaism,  but  itself  originated  under  Greek  in- 
fluences of  mysterious  operation ;  and  that  it  is  to 
be  understood  as  a  blossom  on  the  tree  of  Hellen- 
ism. Religious  philosophers  come  forward  and  de- 
clare that  the  metaphysical  system  which,  as  they 
say,  was  developed  out  of  the  Gospel  is  its  real  ker- 
nel and  the  revelation  of  its  secret ;  but  others  reply 
that  the  Gospel  has  nothing  to  do  with  philosophy, 
that  it  was  meant  for  feeling  and  suffering  human- 
ity, and  that  philosophy  has  only  been  forced  upon 


Preliminary  3 

it.  Finally,  the  latest  critics  that  have  come  into  the 
field  assure  us  that  the  whole  history  of  religion, 
morality,  and  philosophy,  is  nothing  but  wrapping 
and  ornament ;  that  what  at  all  times  underlies 
them,  as  the  only  real  motive  power,  is  the  history 
of  economics;  that,  accordingly,  Christianity,  too, 
was  in  its  origin  nothing  more  than  a  social  move- 
ment and  Christ  a  social  deliverer,  the  deliverer  of 
the  oppressed  lower  classes. 

There  is  something  touching  in  the  anxiety  which 
everyone  shows  to  rediscover  himself,  together  with 
his  own  point  of  view  and  his  own  circle  of  interest, 
in  this  Jesus  Christ,  or  at  least  to  get  a  share  in  him. 
It  is  the  perennial  repetition  of  the  spectacle  which 
was  seen  in  the  "  Gnostic  "  movement  even  as  early 
as  the  second  century,  and  which  takes  the  form  of 
a  struggle,  on  the  part  of  every  conceivable  tend- 
ency of  thought,  for  the  possession  of  Jesus  Christ, 
Why,  quite  recently,  not  only,  I  think,  Tolstoi's 
ideas,  but  even  Nietzsche's,  have  been  exhibited  in 
their  special  affinty  with  the  Gospel ;  and  there  is 
perhaps  more  to  be  said  even  upon  this  subject  that 
is  worth  attention  than  upon  the  connexion  between 
a  good  deal  of  "  theological  "  and  "  philosophical  " 
speculation  and  Christ's  teaching. 

But  nevertheless,  when  taken  together,  the  im- 
pression which  these  contradictory  opinions  convey 
is   disheartening :    the    confusion    seems  hopeless. 


4  What  is  Christianity  ? 

How  can  we  take  it  amiss  of  anyone,  if,  after  trying 
to  find  out  how  the  question  stands,  he  gives  it  up  ? 
Perhaps  he  goes  further,  and  declares  that  after  all 
the  question  does  not  matter.  How  are  we  con- 
cerned with  events  that  happened,  or  with  a  person 
who  lived,  nineteen  hundred  years  ago  ?  We  must 
look  for  our  ideals  and  our  strength  to  the  present; 
to  evolve  them  laboriously  out  of  old  manuscripts  is 
a  fantastic  proceeding  that  can  lead  nowhere.  The 
man  who  so  speaks  is  not  wrong;  but  neither  is  he 
right.  What  we  are  and  what  we  possess,  in  any 
high  sense,  we  possess  from  the  past  and  by  the 
past — only  so  much  of  it,  of  course,  as  has  had  re- 
sults and  makes  its  influence  felt  up  to  the  present 
day.  To  acquire  a  sound  knowledge  of  the  past  is 
the  business  and  the  duty  not  only  of  the  historian 
but  also  of  everyone  who  wishes  to  make  the  wealth 
and  the  strength  so  gained  his  own.  But  that  the 
Gospel  is  a  part  of  this  past  which  nothing  else  can 
replace  has  been  afifirmed  again  and  again  by  the 
greatest  minds.  **  Let  intellectual  and  spiritual  cult- 
ure progress,  and  the  human  mind  expand,  as 
much  as  it  will;  beyond  the  grandeur  and  the  moral 
elevation  of  Christianity,  as  it  sparkles  and  shines 
in  the  Gospels,  the  human  mind  will  not  advance." 
In  these  words  Goethe,  after  making  many  ex- 
periments and  labouring  indefatigably  at  himself, 
summed  up  the  result  to  which  his  moral  and  histori- 


Preliminary  5 

cal  insight  had  led  him.  Even  though  we  were  to 
feel  no  desire  on  our  own  part,  it  would  still  be  worth 
while,  because  of  this  man's  testimony,  to  devote 
our  serious  attention  to  what  he  came  to  regard  as 
so  precious;  and  if,  contrary  to  his  declaration, 
louder  and  more  confident  voices  are  heard  to-day, 
proclaiming  that  the  Christian  religion  has  outlived 
itself,  let  us  accept  that  as  an  invitation  to  make  a 
closer  acquaintance  with  this  religion  whose  certifi- 
cate of  death  people  suppose  that  they  can  already 
exhibit. 

But  in  truth  this  religion  and  the  efforts  which  it 
evokes  are  more  active  to-day  than  they  used  to  be. 
We  may  say  to  the  credit  of  our  age  that  it  takes 
an  eager  interest  in  the  problem  of  the  nature  and 
value  of  Christianity,  and  that  there  is  more  search 
and  inquiry  in  regard  to  this  subject  now  than  was 
the  case  thirty  years  ago.  Even  in  the  experiments 
that  are  made  in  and  about  it,  the  strange  and  ab- 
struse replies  that  are  given  to  questions,  the  way  in 
which  it  is  caricatured,  the  chaotic  confusion  which 
it  exhibits,  nay,  even  in  the  hatred  that  it  excites, 
a  real  life  and  an  earnest  endeavour  may  be  traced. 
Only  do  not  let  us  suppose  that  there  is  anything 
exemplary  in  this  endeavour,  and  that  we  are  the 
first  who,  after  shaking  off  an  authoritative  religion, 
are  struggling  after  one  that  shall  really  make  us  free 
and    be   of  independent  growth — a  struggle  which 


6  What  is  Christianity  ? 

must  of  necessity  give  rise  to  much  confusion  and 
half-truth.     Sixty-two  years  ago  Carlyle  wrote : — 

In  these  distracted  times,  when  the  Religious  Princi- 
ple, driven  out  of  most  Churches,  either  lies  unseen  in 
the  hearts  of  good  men,  looking  and  longing  and  silently 
working  there  towards  some  new  Revelation  ;  or  else 
wanders  homeless  over  the  world,  like  a  disembodied 
soul  seeking  its  terrestrial  organisation, — into  how  many 
strange  shapes,  of  Superstition  and  Fanaticism,  does  it 
not  tentatively  and  errantly  cast  itself  !  The  higher 
Enthusiasm  of  man's  nature  is  for  the  while  without 
Exponent  ;  yet  does  it  continue  indestructible,  un- 
weariedly  active,  and  work  blindly  in  the  great  chaotic 
deep  :  thus  Sect  after  Sect,  and  Church  after  Church, 
bodies  itself  forth,  and  melts  again  into  new  meta- 
morphosis. 

No  one  who  understands  the  times  in  which  we 
live  can  deny  that  these  words  sound  as  if  they  had 
been  written  to-day.  But  it  is  not  with  "  the 
religious  principle"  and  the  ways  in  which  it  has 
developed  that  we  are  going  to  concern  ourselves  in 
these  lectures.  We  shall  try  to  answer  the  more 
modest  but  not  less  pressing  question,  What  is 
Christianity?  What  was  it?  What  has  it  become  ? 
The  answer  to  this  question  may,  we  hope,  also 
throw  light  by  the  way  on  the  more  comprehensive 
one,  What  is  Religion,  and  what  ought  it  to  be  to 
us  ?  In  dealing  with  religion,  is  it  not  after  all  with 
the  Christian  religion    alone  that  we  have  to  do  ? 


Preliminary  7 

Other  religions  no  longer  stir   the  depths  of   our 
hearts. 

What  is  Christianity  ?  It  is  solely  in  its  historical 
sense  that  we  shall  try  to  answer  this  question  here ; 
that  is  to  say,  we  shall  employ  the  methods  of  his- 
torical science,  and  the  experience  of  life  gained  by 
studying  the  actual  course  of  history.  This  ex- 
cludes the  view  of  the  question  taken  by  the  apolo- 
gist and  the  religious  philosopher.  On  this  point 
permit  me  to  say  a  few  words. 

Apologetics  hold  a  necessary  place  in  religious 
knowledge,  and  to  demonstrate  the  validity  of  the 
Christian  religion  and  exhibit  its  importance  for  the 
moral  and  intellectual  life  is  a  great  and  a  worthy 
undertaking.  But  this  undertaking  must  be  kept 
quite  separate  from  the  purely  historical  question 
as  to  the  nature  of  that  religion,  or  else  historical 
research  will  be  brought  into  complete  discredit. 
Moreover,  in  the  kind  of  apologetics  that  is  now  re- 
quired no  really  high  standard  has  yet  been  attained. 
Apart  from  a  few  steps  that  have  been  taken  in  the 
direction  of  improvement,  apologetics  as  a  subject 
of  study  is  in  a  deplorable  state  :  it  is  not  clear  as  to 
the  positions  to  be  defended,  and  it  is  uncertain  as 
to  the  means  to  be  employed.  It  is  also  not  infre- 
quently pursued  in  an  undignified  and  obtrusive 
fashion.     Apologists  imagine  that  they  are  doing  a 


8  What  is  Christianity  ? 

great  work  by  crying  up  religion  as  though  it  were 
a  job-lot  at  a  sale,  or  a  universal  remedy  for  all 
social  ills.  They  are  perpetually  snatching,  too,  at 
all  sorts  of  baubles,  so  as  to  deck  out  religion  in  fine 
clothes.  In  their  endeavour  to  present  it  as  a  glori- 
ous necessity,  they  deprive  it  of  its  earnest  character, 
and  at  the  best  only  prove  that  it  is  something 
which  may  be  safely  accepted  because  it  can  do  no 
harm.  Finally,  they  cannot  refrain  from  slipping 
in  some  church  programme  of  yesterday  and  "  de- 
monstrating "  its  claims  as  well.  The  structure  of 
their  ideas  is  so  loose  that  an  idea  or  two  more 
makes  no  difference.  The  mischief  that  has  been 
thereby  done  already  and  is  still  being  done  is 
indescribable.  No !  the  Christian  religion  is  some- 
thing simple  and  sublime;  it  means  one  thing  and 
one  thing  only :  Eternal  life  in  the  midst  of  time, 
by  the  strength  and  under  the  eyes  of  God.  It  is 
no  ethical  or  social  arcamwi  for  the  preservation  or 
improvement  of  things  generally.  To  make  what  it 
has  done  for  civilisation  and  human  progress  the 
main  question,  and  to  determine  its  value  by  the 
answer,  is  to  do  it  violence  at  the  start.  Goethe 
once  said,  "  Mankind  is  always  advancing,  and 
man  always  remains  the  same."  It  is  to  man  that 
religion  pertains,  to  man,  as  one  who  in  the  midst 
of  all  change  and  progress  himself  never  changes. 
Christian  apologetics  must  recognise,  then,  that  it  is 


Preliminary  9 

with  religion  in  its  simple  nature  and  its  simple 
strength  that  it  has  to  do.  Religion,  truly,  does  not 
exist  for  itself  alone,  but  lives  in  an  inner  fellowship 
with  all  the  activities  of  the  mind  and  with  moral 
and  economical  conditions  as  well.  But  it  is  em- 
phatically not  a  mere  function  or  an  exponent  of 
them;  it  is  a  mighty  power  that  sets  to  work  of  it- 
self, hindering  or  furthering,  destroying  or  making 
fruitful.  The  main  thing  is  to  learn  what  religion 
is  and  in  what  its  essential  character  consists;  no 
matter  what  position  the  individual  who  examines 
it  may  take  up  in  regard  to  it,  or  whether  in  his 
own  life  he  values  it  or  not. 

But  the  point  of  view  of  the  philosophical  theo- 
rist, in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word,  will  also  find  no 
place  in  these  lectures.  Had  they  been  delivered 
sixty  years  ago,  it  would  have  been  our  endeavour 
to  try  to  arrive  by  speculative  reasoning  at  some 
general  conception  of  religion,  and  then  to  define  the 
Christian  religion  accordingly.  But  we  have  rightly 
become  sceptical  about  the  value  of  this  procedure. 
Latet  dolus  in  generalibus.  We  know  to-day  that 
life  cannot  be  spanned  by  general  conceptions,  and 
that  there  is  no  general  conception  of  religion  to 
which  actual  religions  are  related  simply  and  solely 
as  species  to  genus.  Nay,  the  question  may  even 
be  asked  whether  there  is  any  such  generic  concep- 
tion as  "  religion  "  at  all.     Is  the  common  element 


lo  What  is  Christianity  ? 

in  it  anything  more  than  a  vague  disposition  ?  Is 
it  only  an  empty  place  in  our  innermost  being  that 
the  word  denotes,  which  everyone  fills  up  in  a  dif- 
ferent fashion  and  many  do  not  perceive  at  all?  I 
am  not  of  this  opinion;  I  am  convinced,  rather, 
that  at  bottom  we  have  to  do  here  with  something 
which  is  common  to  us  all,  and  which  in  the  course 
of  history  has  struggled  up  out  of  torpor  and  discord 
into  unity  and  light.  I  am  convinced  that  August- 
ine is  right  when  he  says,  "  Thou,  Lord,  hast 
made  us  for  Thyself,  and  our  heart  is  restless  until 
it  finds  rest  in  Thee."  But  to  prove  that  this  is  so; 
to  exhibit  the  nature  and  the  claims  of  religion  by 
psychological  analysis,  including  the  psychology  of 
peoples,  is  not  the  task  that  we  shall  undertake  in 
what  follows.  We  shall  keep  to  the  purely  histor- 
ical theme :  What  is  the  Christian  religion  ? 

Where  are  we  to  look  for  our  materials  ?  The 
answer  seems  to  be  simple  and  at  the  same  time 
exhaustive :  Jesus  Christ  and  his  Gospel.  But  how- 
ever little  doubt  there  may  be  that  this  must  form 
not  only  our  point  of  departure  but  also  the  matter 
with  which  our  investigations  will  mainly  deal,  it  is 
equally  certain  that  we  must  not  be  content  to  ex- 
hibit the  mere  image  of  Jesus  Christ  and  the  main 
features  of  his  Gospel.  We  must  not  be  content  to 
stop  there,  because  every  great  and  powerful  per- 
sonality reveals  a  part  of  what  it  is  only  when  seen 


The  Gospel  ii 

in  those  whom  it  influences.  Nay,  it  may  be  said 
that  the  more  powerful  the  personality  which  a 
man  possesses,  and  the  more  he  takes  hold  of  the  in- 
ner life  of  others,  the  less  can  the  sum-total  of  what 
he  is  be  known  only  by  what  he  himself  says  and 
does.  We  must  look  at  the  reflection  and  the 
effects  which  he  produced  in  those  whose  leader  and 
master  he  became.  That  is  why  a  complete  answer 
to  the  question,  What  is  Christianity,  is  impossible 
so  long  as  we  are  restricted  to  Jesus  Christ's  teach- 
ing alone.  We  must  include  the  first  generation  of 
his  disciples  as  well — those  who  ate  and  drank  with 
him — and  we  must  listen  to  what  they  tell  us  of  the 
effect  which  he  had  upon  their  lives. 

But  even  this  does  not  exhaust  our  materials.  If 
Christianity  is  an  example  of  a  great  power  valid  not 
for  one  particular  epoch  alone ;  if  in  and  through  it, 
not  once  only,  but  again  and  again,  great  forces 
have  been  disengaged,  we  must  include  all  the  later 
products  of  its  spirit.  It  is  not  a  question  of  a 
**  doctrine  "  being  handed  down  by  uniform  repe- 
tition or  arbitrarily  distorted ;  it  is  a  question  of  a 
lifcj  again  and  again  kindled  afresh,  and  now  burn- 
ing with  a  flame  of  its  own.  We  may  also  add  that 
Christ  himself  and  the  apostles  were  convinced 
that  the  religion  which  they  were  planting  would 
in  the  ages  to  come  have  a  greater  destiny  and  a 
deeper  meaning  than  it  possessed  at  the  time  of  its 


12  What  is  Christianity? 

institution ;  they  trusted  to  its  spirit  leading  from 
one  point  of  light  to  another  and  developing  higher 
forces.  Just  as  we  cannot  obtain  a  complete  know- 
ledge of  a  tree  without  regarding  not  only  its  root 
and  its  stem  but  also  its  bark,  its  branches,  and  the 
way  in  which  it  blooms,  so  we  cannot  form  any 
right  estimate  of  the  Christian  religion  unless  we 
take  our  stand  upon  a  comprehensive  induction  that 
shall  cover  all  the  facts  of  its  history.  It  is  true 
that  Christianity  has  had  its  classical  epoch;  nay 
more,  it  had  a  founder  who  himself  was  what  he 
taught — to  steep  ourselves  in  him  is  still  the  chief 
matter;  but  to  restrict  ourselves  to  him  means  to 
take  a  point  of  view  too  low  for  his  significance. 
Individual  religious  life  was  what  he  wanted  to 
kindle  and  what  he  did  kindle;  it  is,  as  we  shall  see, 
his  peculiar  greatness  to  have  led  men  to  God,  so 
that  they  may  thenceforth  live  their  own  life  with 
Him.  How,  then,  can  we  be  silent  about  the  his- 
tory of  the  Gospel  if  we  wish  to  know  what  he  was  ? 
It  may  be  objected  that  put  in  this  way  the  prob- 
lem is  too  difficult,  and  that  its  solution  threatens 
to  be  accompanied  by  many  errors  and  defects. 
That  is  not  to  be  denied;  but  to  state  a  problem  in 
easier  terms,  that  is  to  say  in  this  case  inaccurately, 
because  of  the  difficulties  surrounding  it,  would  be 
a  very  perverse  expedient.  Moreover,  even  though 
the  difficulties  increase,  the  work  is,  on  the  other 


The  Gospel  13 

hand,  facilitated  by  the  problem  being  stated  in  a 
larger  manner;  for  it  helps  us  to  grasp  what  is  es- 
sential in  the  phenomena,  and  to  distinguish  kernel 
and  husk. 

Jesus  Christ  and  his  disciples  were  situated  in 
their  day  just  as  we  are  situated  in  ours;  that  is  to 
say,  their  feelings,  their  thoughts,  their  judgments 
and  their  efforts  were  bounded  by  the  horizon  and 
the  framework  in  which  their  own  nation  was  set 
and  by  its  condition  at  the  time.  Had  it  been  other- 
wise, they  would  not  have  been  men  of  flesh  and 
blood,  but  spectral  btings.  For  seventeen  hundred 
years,  indeed,  people  thought,  and  many  among  us 
still  think,  that  the  "  humanity"  of  Jesus  Christ, 
which  is  a  part  of  their  creed,  is  sufficiently  provided 
for  by  the  assumption  that  he  had  a  human  body 
and  a  human  soul.  As  if  it  were  possible  to  have 
that  without  having  any  definite  character  as  an  in- 
dividual! To  be  a  man  means,  in  the  first  place,  to 
possess  a  certain  mental  and  spiritual  disposition, 
determined  in  such  and  such  a  way,  and  thereby 
limited  and  circumscribed;  and,  in  the  second 
place,  it  means  to  be  situated,  with  this  disposition, 
in  an  historical  environment  which  in  its  turn  is  also 
limited  and  circumscribed.  Outside  this  there  are 
no  such  things  as  "  men."  It  at  once  follows,  how- 
ever, that  a  man  can  think,  speak,  and  do  absolutely 
nothing  at  all  in  which  his  peculiar  disposition  and 


1 4  What  is  Christianity? 

his  own  age  are  not  coefficients.  A  single  word 
may  seem  to  be  really  classical  and  valid  for  all  time, 
and  yet  the  very  language  in  which  it  is  spoken 
gives  it  very  palpable  limitations.  Much  less  is 
a  spiritual  personality,  as  a  whole,  susceptible  of 
being  represented  in  a  way  that  will  banish  the  feel- 
ing of  its  limitations,  and  with  those  limitations, 
the  sense  of  something  strange  or  conventional ;  and 
this  feeling  must  necessarily  be  enhanced  the  farther 
in  point  of  time  the  spectator  is  removed. 

From  these  circumstances  it  follows  that  the  his- 
torian, whose  business  and  highest  duty  it  is  to  de- 
termine what  is  of  permanent  value,  is  of  necessity 
required  not  to  cleave  to  words  but  to  find  out  what 
is  essential.  The  "whole"  Christ,  the  **  whole  " 
Gospel,  if  we  mean  by  this  motto  the  external  im- 
age taken  in  all  its  details  and  set  up  for  imitation, 
is  just  as  bad  and  deceptive  a  shibboleth  as  the 
"  whole  "  Luther,  and  the  like.  It  is  bad  because 
it  enslaves  us,  and  it  is  deceptive  because  the  peo- 
ple who  proclaim  it  do  not  think  of  taking  it  seri- 
ously, and  could  not  do  so  if  they  tried.  They 
cannot  do  so  because  they  cannot  cease  to  feel,  un- 
derstand and  judge  as  children  of  their  age. 

There  are  only  two  possibilities  here:  either  the 
Gospel  is  in  all  respects  identical  with  its  earliest 
form,  in  which  case  it  came  with  its  time  and  has 
departed   with  it;    or   else    it    contains   something 


The  Gospel  15 

which,  under  differing  historical  forms,  is  of  perma- 
nent validity.  The  latter  is  the  true  view.  The 
history  of  the  Church  shows  us  in  its  very  com- 
mencement that  "primitive  Christianity"  had  to 
disappear  in  order  that  "Christianity"  might  re- 
main ;  and  in  the  same  way  in  later  ages  one 
metamorphosis  followed  upon  another.  From  the 
beginning  it  was  a  question  of  getting  rid  of  formu- 
las, correcting  expectations,  altering  ways  of  feel- 
ing, and  this  is  a  process  to  which  there  is  no  end. 
But  by  the  very  fact  that  our  survey  embraces  the 
whole  course  as  well  as  the  inception  we  enhance  our 
standard  of  what  is  essential  and  of  real  value. 

We  enhance  our  standard,  but  we  need  not  wait 
to  take  it  from  the  history  of  those  later  ages.  The 
thing  itself  reveals  it.  We  shall  see  that  the  Gospel 
in  the  Gospel  is  something  so  simple,  something 
that  speaks  to  us  with  so  much  power,  that  it  can- 
not easily  be  mistaken.  No  far-reaching  directions 
as  to  method,  no  general  introductions,  are  neces- 
sary to  enable  us  to  find  the  way  to  it.  No  one 
who  possesses  a  fresh  eye  for  what  is  alive,  and  a 
true  feeling  for  what  is  really  great,  can  fail  to  see 
it  and  distinguish  it  from  its  contemporary  integu- 
ment. And  even  though  there  may  be  many  indi- 
vidual aspects  of  it  where  the  task  of  distinguishing 
what  is  permanent  from  what  is  fleeting,  what  is 
rudimentary  from  what  is  merely  historical,  is  not 


i6  What  is  Christianity? 

quite  easy,  we  must  not  be  like  the  child  who,  want- 
ing to  get  at  the  kernel  of  a  bulb,  went  on  picking 
off  the  leaves  until  there  was  nothing  left,  and  then 
could  not  help  seeing  that  it  was  just  the  leaves  that 
made  the  bulb.  Endeavours  of  this  kind  are  not 
unknown  in  the  history  of  the  Christian  religion, 
but  they  fade  before  those  other  endeavours  which 
seek  to  convince  us  that  there  is  no  such  thing  as 
either  kernel  or  husk,  growth  or  decay,  but  that 
everything  is  of  equal  value  and  alike  permanent. 

In  these  lectures,  then,  v/e  shall  deal  first  of  all 
with  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  this  theme  will 
occupy  the  greater  part  of  our  attention.  We  shall 
then  show  what  impression  he  himself  and  his  Gos- 
pel made  upon  the  first  generation  of  his  disciples. 
Finally,  we  shall  follow  the  leading  changes  which 
the  Christian  idea  has  undergone  in  the  course  of 
history,  and  try  to  recognise  its  chief  types.  What 
is  common  to  all  the  forms  which  it  has  taken,  cor- 
rected by  reference  to  the  Gospel,  and,  conversely, 
the  chief  features  of  the  Gospel,  corrected  by  refer- 
ence to  history,  will,  we  may  be  allowed  to  hope, 
bring  us  to  the  kernel  of  the  matter.  Within  the 
limits  of  a  short  series  of  lectures  it  is,  of  course, 
only  to  what  is  important  that  attention  can  be 
called ;  but  perhaps  there  will  be  no  disadvantage  in 
fixing  our  attention,  for  once,  only  on  the  strong 
lines   and  prominent  points  of  the  relief,   and,  by 


The  Gospel  17 

putting  what  is  secondary  into  the  background,  in 
looking  at  the  vast  material  in  a  concentrated  form. 
We  shall  even  refrain,  and  permissibly  refrain,  from 
enlarging,  by  way  of  introduction,  on  Judaism  and 
its  external  and  internal  relations,  and  on  the 
Graeco-Roman  world.  We  must  never,  of  course, 
wholly  shut  our  eyes  to  them — nay,  we  must  always 
keep  them  in  mind ;  but  diffuse  explanations  in  re- 
gard to  these  matters  are  unnecessary.  Jesus 
Christ's  teaching  will  at  once  bring  us  by  steps 
which,  if  few,  will  be  great,  to  a  height  where  its 
connexion  with  Judaism  is  seen  to  be  only  a  loose 
one,  and  most  of  the  threads  leading  from  it  into 
"  contemporary  history  "  become  of  no  importance 
at  all.  This  may  seem  a  paradoxical  thing  to  say; 
for  just  now  we  are  being  earnestly  assured,  with 
an  air  as  though  it  were  some  new  discovery  that 
was  being  imparted  to  us,  that  Jesus  Christ's  teach- 
ing cannot  be  understood,  nay,  cannot  be  accurately 
represented,  except  by  having  regard  to  its  con- 
nexion with  the  Jewish  doctrines  prevalent  at  the 
time,  and  by  first  of  all  setting  them  out  in  full. 
There  is  much  that  is  true  in  this  statement,  and 
yet,  as  we  shall  see,  it  is  incorrect.  It  becomes  ab- 
solutely false,  however,  when  worked  up  into  the 
dazzling  thesis  that  the  Gospel  is  intelligible  only  as 
the  religion  of  a  despairing  section  of  the  Jewish  na- 
tion ;  that  it  was  the  last  effort  of  a  decadent  age. 


1 8  What  is  Christianity? 

driven  by  distress  into  a  renunciation  of  this  earth, 
and  then  trying  to  storm  heaven  and  demanding 
civic  rights  there — a  religion  of  miserabilism !  It  is 
rather  remarkable  that  the  really  desperate  were 
just  those  who  did  not  welcome  it,  but  fought 
against  it ;  remarkable  that  its  leaders,  so  far  as  we 
know  them,  do  not,  in  fact,  bear  any  of  the  marks 
of  sickly  despair;  most  remarkable  of  all,  that  while 
indeed  renouncing  the  world  and  its  goods,  they 
establish,  in  love  and  holiness,  a  brotherly  union 
which  declares  war  on  the  world's  misery.  The 
oftener  I  re-read  and  consider  the  Gospels,  the  more 
do  I  find  that  the  contemporary  discords,  in  the 
midst  of  which  the  Gospel  stood,  and  out  of  which 
it  arose,  sink  into  the  background.  I  entertain  no 
doubt  that  the  founder  had  his  eye  upon  man  in 
whatever  external  situation  he  might  be  found — 
upon  man  who,  fundamentally,  always  remains  the 
same,  whether  he  be  moving  upwards  or  down- 
wards, whether  he  be  in  riches  or  poverty,  whether 
he  be  of  strong  mind  or  of  weak.  It  is  the  con- 
sciousness of  all  these  oppositions  being  ultimately 
beneath  it,  and  of  its  own  place  above  them,  that 
gives  the  Gospel  its  sovereignty ;  for  in  every  man 
it  looks  to  the  point  that  is  unaffected  by  all  these 
differences.  This  is  very  clear  in  Paul's  case;  he 
dominates  all  earthly  things  and  circumstances  like 
a  king,  and  desires  to  see  them  so  dominated.    The 


The  Gospel  19 

thesis  of  the  decadent  age  and  the  reh'gion  of  the 
wretched  may  serve  to  lead  us  into  the  outer  court; 
it  may  even  correctly  point  to  that  which  originally 
gave  the  Gospel  its  form ;  but  if  it  is  offered  us  as  a 
key  for  the  understanding  of  this  religion  in  itself, 
we  must  reject  it.  Moreover,  this  thesis  and  the 
pretensions  which  it  makes  are  only  illustrations  of 
a  fashion  which  has  become  general  in  the  writing 
of  history,  and  which  in  that  province  will  naturally 
have  a  longer  reign  than  other  fashions,  because  by 
its  means  much  that  was  obscure  has,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  been  cleared  up.  But  to  the  heart  of  the 
matter  its  devotees  do  not  penetrate,  as  they 
silently  assume  that  no  such  heart  exists. 

Let  me  conclude  this  lecture  by  touching  briefly 
on  one  other  important  point.  In  history  absolute 
judgments  are  impossible.  This  is  a  truth  which  in 
these  days— I  say  advisedly,  in  these  days — is  clear 
and  incontestable.  History  can  only  show  how 
things  have  been ;  and  even  where  we  can  throw 
light  upon  the  past,  and  understand  and  criticise  it, 
we  must  not  presume  to  think  that  by  any  process 
of  abstraction  absolute  judgments  as  to  the  value  to 
be  assigned  to  past  events  can  be  obtained  from  the 
results  of  a  purely  historical  survey.  Such  judg- 
ments are  the  creation  only  of  feeling  and  of  will; 
they  are  a  subjective  act.  The  false  notion  that  the 
understanding  can  produce  them  is  a  heritage  of 


20  What  is  Christianity  ? 

that  protracted  epoch  in  which  knowing  and  know- 
ledge were  expected  to  accomplish  everything ;  in 
which  it  was  believed  that  they  could  be  stretched 
so  as  to  be  capable  of  covering  and  satisfying  all 
the  needs  of  the  mind  and  the  heart.  That  they 
cannot  do.  This  is  a  truth  which,  in  many  an  hour 
of  ardent  work,  falls  heavily  upon  our  soul,  and  yet 
— what  a  hopeless  thing  it  would  be  for  mankind  if 
the  higher  peace  to  which  it  aspires,  and  the  clear- 
ness, the  certainty  and  the  strength  for  which  it 
strives,  were  dependent  on  the  measure  of  its  learn- 
ing and  its  knowledge. 


LECTURE    II 

OUR  first  section  deals  with  the  main  features 
of  the  message  dehvered  by  Jesus  Christ. 
They  include  the  form  in  which  he  delivered  what 
he  had  to  say.  We  shall  see  how  essential  a  part  of 
his  character  is  here  exhibited,  for  "  he  spoke  as  one 
having  authority  and  not  as  the  Scribes."  But  be- 
fore describing  these  features  I  feel  it  my  duty  to 
tell  you  briefly  how  matters  stand  in  regard  to  the 
sources  of  our  knowledge. 

Our  authorities  for  the  message  which  Jesus 
Christ  delivered  are — apart  from  certain  important 
statements  made  by  Paul — the  first  three  Gospels. 
Everything  that  we  know,  independently  of  these 
Gospels,  about  Jesus'  history  and  his  teaching,  may 
be  easily  put  on  a  small  sheet  of  paper,  so  little 
does  it  come  to.  In  particular,  the  fourth  Gospel, 
which  does  not  emanate  or  profess  to  emanate 
from  the  apostle  John,  cannot  be  taken  as  an  his- 
torical authority  in  the  ordinary  meaning  of  the 
word.  The  author  of  it  acted  with  sovereign  free- 
dom, transposed  events  and  put  them  in  a  strange 
light,  drew  up  the  discourses  himself,  and  illustrated 

21 


22  What  is  Christianity  ? 

great  thoughts  by  imaginary  situations.  Although, 
therefore,  his  work  is  not  altogether  devoid  of  a 
real,  if  scarcely  recognisable,  traditional  element,  it 
can  hardly  make  any  claim  to  be  considered  an 
authority  for  Jesus'  history ;  only  little  of  what  he 
says  can  be  accepted,  and  that  little  with  caution. 
On  the  other  hand,  it  is  an  authority  of  the  first 
rank  for  answering  the  question,  What  vivid  views 
of  Jesus'  person,  what  kind  of  light  and  warmth, 
did  the  Gospel  disengage  ? 

Sixty  years  ago  David  Friedrich  Strauss  thought 
that  he  had  almost  entirely  destroyed  the  historical 
credibility  not  only  of  the  fourth  but  also  of  the 
first  three  Gospels  as  well.  The  historical  criticism 
of  two  generations  has  succeeded  in  restoring  that 
credibility  in  its  main  outlines.  These  Gospels  are 
not,  it  is  true,  historical  works  any  more  than  the 
fourth ;  they  were  not  written  with  the  simple  ob- 
ject of  giving  the  facts  as  they  were ;  they  are  books 
composed  for  the  work  of  evangelisation.  Their 
purpose  is  to  awaken  a  belief  in  Jesus  Christ's  per- 
son and  mission ;  and  the  purpose  is  served  by  the 
description  of  his  deeds  and  discourses,  as  well  as 
by  the  references  to  the  Old  Testament.  Neverthe- 
less they  are  not  altogether  useless  as  sources  of  his- 
tory, more  especially  as  the  object  with  which  they 
were  written  is  not  supplied  from  without,  but  coin- 
cides in  part  with  what  Jesus  intended.     But  such 


The  Gospel  23 

other  great  leading  purposes  as  have  been  ascribed 
to  the  evangelists  have  been  one  and  all  shown  to 
lack  any  foundation,  although  with  each  individual 
evangelist  many  secondary  purposes  may  have  come 
into  play.  The  Gospels  are  not  "party  tracts"; 
neither  are  they  writings  which  as  yet  bear  the  radi- 
cal  impress  of  the  Greek  spirit.  In  their  essential 
substance  they  belong  to  the  first,  the  Jewish,  epoch 
of  Christianity,  that  brief  epoch  which  may  be  de- 
noted as  the  palaeontological.  That  we  possess  any 
reports  dating  from  that  time,  even  though,  as  is 
obvious  in  the  first  and  third  Gospel,  the  setting 
and  the  composition  are  by  another  hand,  is  one  of 
those  historical  arrangements  for  which  we  cannot 
be  too  thankful.  Criticism  to-day  universally  re- 
cognises the  unique  character  of  the  Gospels.  What 
especially  marks  them  off  from  all  subsequent  liter- 
ature is  the  way  in  which  they  state  their  facts. 
This  species  of  literary  art,  which  took  shape  partly 
by  analogy  with  the  didactic  narratives  of  the  Jews, 
and  partly  from  catechetical  necessities — this  simple 
and  impressive  form  of  exposition  was,  even  a  few 
decades  later,  no  longer  capable  of  exact  reproduc- 
tion. From  the  time  that  the  Gospel  was  trans- 
ferred to  the  broad  ground  of  the  Graeco-Roman 
world  it  appropriated  the  literary  forms  of  the 
Greeks,  and  the  style  of  the  evangelists  was  then 
felt  to  be  something  strange  but  sublime.     When 


24  What  is  Christianity  ? 

all  is  said,  the  Greek  language  lies  upon  these  writ- 
ings only  like  a  diaphanous  veil,  and  it  requires 
hardly  any  effort  to  retranslate  their  contents  into 
Hebrew  or  Aramaic.  That  the  tradition  here  pre- 
sented to  us  is,  in  the  main,  at  first  hand  is  obvious. 
How  fixed  this  tradition  was  in  regard  to  its  form 
is  proved  by  the  third  Gospel.  It  was  composed  by 
a  Greek,  probably  in  the  time  of  Domitian ;  and  in 
the  second  part  of  his  work,  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles 
— besides  the  preface  to  the  first — he  shows  us  that 
he  was  familiar  with  the  literary  language  of  his 
nation  and  that  he  was  an  excellent  master  of  style. 
But  in  the  Gospel  narrative  he  did  not  dare  to 
abandon  the  traditional  type :  he  tells  his  story  in 
the  same  style  as  Mark  and  Matthew,  with  the  same, 
connexion  of  sentences,  the  same  colour,  nay,  with 
many  of  precisely  the  same  details ;  it  is  only  the 
ruder  words  and  expressions,  which  would  offend 
literary  taste,  that  are  sparingly  corrected.  There 
is  another  respect,  too,  in  which  his  Gospel  strikes 
us  as  remarkable:  he  assures  us  at  the  beginning  of 
it  that  he  has  "  had  perfect  understanding  of  all 
things  from  the  very  first,"  and  has  examined  many 
accounts.  But  if  we  test  him  by  his  authorities, 
we  find  that  he  has  kept  in  the  main  to  Mark's  Gos- 
pel, and  to  a  source  which  we  also  find  appearing 
again  in  Matthew.  These  accounts  both  seemed  to 
him,  as  a  respectable  chronicler,  to  be  preferable  to 


The  Gospel  25 

the  crowd  of  others.  That  offers  a  good  guarantee 
for  them.  No  historian  has  found  that  it  is  possible 
or  necessary  to  substitute  any  other  tradition  for 
the  one  which  we  have  here. 

Another  point:  this  tradition  is,  apart  from  the 
story  of  the  Passion,  almost  exclusively  Galilean  in 
its  character.  Had  not  the  history  of  Jesus'  public 
activity  been  really  bounded  by  this  geographical 
horizon,  tradition  could  not  have  so  described  it; 
for  every  historical  narrative  with  an  eye  to  effect 
would  have  represented  him  as  working  chiefly  in 
Jerusalem.  That  is  the  account  given  by  the  fourth 
Gospel.  That  our  first  three  evangelists  almost  en- 
tirely refrain  from  saying  anything  about  Jerusalem 
arouses  a  good  prejudice  in  their  favour. 

It  is  true  that,  measured  by  the  standard  of 
** agreement,  inspiration  and  completeness,"  these 
writings  leave  a  very  great  deal  to  be  desired,  and 
even  when  judged  by  a  more  human  standard  they 
suffer  from  not  a  few  imperfections.  Rude  addi- 
tions from  a  later  age  they  do  not,  indeed,  exhibit 
— it  will  always  remain  a  noteworthy  fact  that,  con- 
versely, it  is  only  the  fourth  Gospel  which  makes 
Greeks  ask  after  Jesus — but  still  they,  too,  reflect, 
here  and  there,  the  circumstances  in  which  the 
primitive  Christian  community  was  placed  and  the 
experiences  which  it  afterwards  underwent.  People 
nowadays,  however,  put  such  constructions  on  the 


26  What  is  Christianity  '^ 

text  more  readily  than  is  necessary.  Further,  the 
conviction  that  Old  Testament  prophecy  was  ful- 
filled in  Jesus'  history  had  a  disturbing  effect  on 
tradition.  Lastly,  in  some  of  the  narratives  the 
miraculous  element  is  obviously  intensified.  On 
the  other  hand,  Strauss'  contention  that  the  Gos- 
pels contain  a  very  great  deal  that  is  mythical  has 
and  not  been  borne  out,  even  if  the  very  indefinite 
defective  conception  of  what  "mythical"  means 
in  Strauss'  application  of  the  word,  be  allowed  to 
pass.  It  is  almost  exclusively  in  the  account  of 
Jesus'  childhood,  and  there  only  sparingly,  that  a 
mythical  touch  can  be  traced.  None  of  these  dis- 
turbing elements  affect  the  heart  of  the  narrative ; 
not  a  few  of  them  easily  lend  themselves  to  correc- 
tion, partly  by  a  comparison  of  the  Gospels  one 
with  another,  partly  through  the  sound  judgment 
that  is  matured  by  historical  study. 

But  the  miraculous  element,  all  these  reports  of 
miracles!  Not  Strauss  only,  but  many  others  too, 
have  allowed  themselves  to  be  frightened  by  them 
into  roundly  denying  the  credibility  of  the  Gospels. 
But,  on  the  other  hand,  historical  science  in  this 
last  generation  has  taken  a  great  step  in  advance  by 
learning  to  pass  a  more  intelligent  and  benevolent 
judgment  on  those  narratives,  and  accordingly  even 
reports  of  the  marvellous  can  now  be  counted 
amongst  the  materials  of  history  and  turned  to  good 


The  Miraculous  Element  27 

account.  I  owe  it  to  you  and  to  the  subject  briefly 
to  specify  the  position  which  historical  science  to- 
day takes  up  in  regard  to  these  reports. 

In  the  first  place,  we  know  that  the  Gospels  come 
from  a  time  in  which  the  marvellous  may  be  said  to 
have  been  something  of  almost  daily  occurrence. 
People  felt  and  saw  that  they  were  surrounded  by 
wonders,  and  not  by  any  means  only  in  the  religious 
sphere.  Certain  spiritualists  among  us  excepted, 
we  are  now  accustomed  to  associate  the  question  of 
miracles  exclusively  with  the  question  of  religion. 
Ill  those  days  it  was  otherwise.  The  fountains  of 
the  marvellous  were  many.  Some  sort  of  divinity 
was,  of  course,  supposed  to  be  at  work  in  every 
case ;  it  was  a  god  who  accomplished  the  miracle ; 
but  it  was  not  to  every  god  that  people  stood  in  a 
religious  relation.  Further,  in  those  days,  the  strict 
conception  which  we  now  attach  to  the  word  "  mir- 
acle "  was  as  yet  unknown ;  it  came  in  only  with  a 
knowledge  of  the  laws  of  Nature  and  their  general 
validity.  Before  that,  no  sound  insight  existed  into 
what  was  possible  and  what  was  impossible,  what 
was  rule  and  what  was  exception.  But  where  this 
distinction  is  not  clear,  or  where,  as  the  case  may 
be,  the  question  has  not  yet  been  raised  at  all  in  any 
rigorous  form,  there  are  no  such  things  as  miracles 
in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word.  No  one  can  feel 
anything   to   be   an    interruption    of  the  order   of 


28  What  is  Christianity  ? 

Nature  who  does  not  yet  know  what  the  order  of 
Nature  is.  Miracles,  then,  could  not  possess  the 
significance  for  that  age  which,  if  they  existed, 
they  would  possess  for  ours.  For  that  age  all  won- 
ders were  only  extraordinary  events,  and,  even  if 
they  formed  a  world  by  themselves,  it  was  certain 
that  there  were  countless  points  in  which  that  other 
world  mysteriously  encroached  upon  our  own.  Nor 
was  it  only  God's  messengers,  but  magicians  and 
charlatans  as  well,  who  were  thought  to  be  pos- 
sessed of  some  of  these  miraculous  powers.  The 
significance  attaching  to  "  miracles  "  was,  therefore, 
in  those  days  a  subject  of  never-ending  controversy; 
at  one  moment  a  high  value  was  set  upon  them  and 
they  were  considered  to  belong  to  the  very  essence 
of  religion;  at  another,  they  were  spoken  of  with 
contempt. 

In  the  second  place,  we  now  know  that  it  is  not 
after  they  have  been  long  dead,  nor  even  after  the 
lapse  of  many  years,  that  miracles  have  been  re- 
ported of  eminent  persons,  but  at  once,  often  the 
very  next  day.  The  habit  of  condemning  a  narrat- 
ive, or  of  ascribing  it  to  a  later  age,  only  because 
it  includes  stories  of  miracles,  is  a  piece  of  prejudice. 

In  the  third  place,  we  are  firmly  convinced  that 
what  happens  in  space  and  time  is  subject  to  the 
general  laws  of  motion,  and  that  in  this  sense,  as 
an  interruption  of  the  order  of  Nature,  there  can  be 


The  Miraculous  Element  29 

no  such  things  as  "  miracles."  But  we  also  recog- 
nise that  the  religious  man — if  religion  really  per- 
meates him  and  is  something  more  than  a  belief  in 
the  religion  of  others — is  certain  that  he  is  not  shut 
up  within  a  blind  and  brutal  course  of  Nature,  but 
that  this  course  of  Nature  serves  higher  ends,  or,  as 
it  may  be,  that  some  inner  and  divine  power  can 
help  us  so  to  encounter  it  as  that  '*  everything  must 
necessarily  be  for  the  best."  This  experience, 
which  I  might  express  in  one  word  as  the  ability  to 
escape  from  the  power  and  the  service  of  transitory 
things,  is  always  felt  afresh  to  be  a  miracle  each 
time  that  it  occurs;  it  is  inseparable  from  every 
higher  religion,  and  were  it  to  be  surrendered,  re- 
ligion would  be  at  an  end.  But  it  is  an  experience 
which  is  equally  true  of  the  life  of  the  individual 
and  of  the  great,  course  of  human  history.  How 
clearly  and  logically,  then,  must  a  religious  man 
think,  if,  in  spite  of  this  experience,  he  holds  firmly 
to  the  inviolable  character  of  what  happens  in  space 
and  time.  Who  can  wonder  that  even  great  minds 
fail  to  keep  the  two  spheres  quite  separate  ?  And 
as  we  all  live,  first  and  foremost,  in  the  domain  not 
of  ideas  but  of  perceptions,  and  in  a  language  of 
metaphor,  how  can  we  avoid  conceiving  that  which 
is  divine  and  makes  us  free  as  a  mighty  power  work- 
ing upon  the  order  of  Nature,  and  breaking  through 
or  arresting  it?    This  notion,  though  it  belong  only 


30  What  is  Christianity  ? 

to  the  realm  of  fantasy  and  metaphor,  will,  it  seems, 
last  as  long  as  religion  itself. 

In  the  fourth  place,  and  lastly,  although  the  or- 
der of  Nature  be  inviolable,  we  are  not  yet  by  any 
means  acquainted  with  all  the  forces  working  in  it 
and  acting  reciprocally  with  other  forces.  Our  ac- 
quaintance even  with  the  forces  inherent  in  matter, 
and  with  the  field  of  their  action,  is  incomplete; 
while  of  psychic  forces  we  know  very  much  less. 
We  see  that  a  strong  will  and  a  firm  faith  exert  an 
influence  upon  the  life  of  the  body,  and  produce 
phenomena  which  strike  us  as  marvellous.  Who  is 
there  up  to  now  that  has  set  any  sure  bounds  to  the 
province  of  the  possible  and  the  actual?  No  one. 
Who  can  say  how  far  the  influence  of  soul  upon  soul 
and  of  soul  upon  body  reaches?  No  one.  Who 
can  still  maintain  that  any  extraordinary  phenome- 
non that  may  appear  in  this  domain  is  entirely  based 
on  error  and  delusion?  Miracles,  it  is  true,  do  not 
happen ;  but  of  the  marvellous  and  the  inexplicable 
there  is  plenty.  In  our  present  state  of  knowledge 
we  have  become  more  careful,  more  hesitating  in 
our  judgment,  in  regard  to  the  stories  of  the  mirac- 
ulous which  we  have  received  from  antiquity.  That 
the  earth  in  its  course  stood  still;  that  a  she-ass 
spoke ;  that  a  storm  was  quieted  by  a  word,  we  do 
not  believe,  and  we  shall  never  again  believe ;  but 
that  the  lame  walked,  the  blind  saw,  and  the  deaf 


The  Miraculous  Element  31 

heard  will   not    be  so  summarily   dismissed   as  an 
illusion. 

From  these  suggestions  you  can  arrive  for  your- 
selves at  the  right  position  to  take  up  in  regard  to 
the  miraculous  stories  related  in  the  Gospels,  and  at 
their  net  results.  In  particular  cases,  that  is  to  say, 
in  the  application  of  general  principles  to  concrete 
statements,  some  uncertainty  will  always  remain. 
So  far  as  I  can  judge,  the  stories  may  be  grouped  as 
follows: — (i)  Stories  which  had  their  origin  in  an 
exaggerated  view  of  natural  events  of  an  impressive 
character ;  (2)  stories  which  had  their  origin  in  say- 
ings or  parables,  or  in  the  projection  of  inner  ex- 
periences on  to  the  external  v/orld ;  (3)  stories  such 
as  arose  in  the  interests  of  the  fulfilment  of  Old 
Testament  sayings;  (4)  stories  of  surprising  cures 
effected  by  Jesus'  spiritual  force  ;  (5)  stories  of  which 
we  cannot  fathom  the  secret.  It  is  very  remark- 
able, however,  that  Jesus  himself  did  not  assign 
that  critical  importance  to  his  miraculous  deeds 
which  even  the  evangelist  Mark  and  the  others  all 
attributed  to  them.  Did  he  not  exclaim,  in  tones 
of  complaint  and  accusation,  "  Unless  ye  see  signs 
and  wonders,  ye  will  not  believe!"  ?  He  who  ut- 
tered these  words  cannot  have  held  that  belief  in 
the  wonders  which  he  wrought  was  the  right  or  the 
only  avenue  to  the  recognition  of  his  person  and  his 
mission ;  nay,  in  all  essential  points  he  must  have 


32  What  is  Christianity  ? 

thought  of  them  quite  otherwise  than  his  evangel- 
ists. And  the  remarkable  fact  that  these  very 
evangelists,  without  appreciating  its  range,  hand 
down  the  statement  that  Jesus  "  did  not  many 
mighty  works  there  because  of  their  unbelief," 
shows  us,  from  another  and  a  different  side,  with 
what  caution  we  must  receive  these  miraculous 
stories,  and  into  what  category  we  must  put  them. 

It  follows  from  all  this  that  we  must  not  try  to 
evade  the  Gospel  by  entrenching  ourselves  behind 
the  miraculous  stories  related  by  the  evangelists.  In 
spite  of  those  stories,  nay,  in  part  even  in  them,  we 
are  presented  with  a  reality  which  has  claims  upon 
our  participation.  Study  it,  and  do  not  let  your- 
selves be  deterred  because  this  or  that  miraculous 
story  strikes  you  as  strange  or  leaves  you  cold.  If 
there  is  anything  here  that  you  find  unintelligible, 
put  it  quietly  aside.  Perhaps  you  will  have  to  leave 
it  there  forever;  perhaps  the  meaning  will  dawn 
upon  you  later  and  the  story  assume  a  significance 
of  which  you  never  dreamt.  Once  more,  let  me  say  : 
do  not  be  deterred.  The  question  of  miracles  is  of 
relative  indifference  in  comparison  with  everything 
else  which  is  to  be  found  in  the  Gospels.  It  is  not 
miracles  that  matter;  the  question  on  which  every- 
thing turns  is  whether  we  are  helplessly  yoked  to 
an  inexorable  necessity,  or  whether  a  God  exists 
who  rules  and  governs,  and  whose  power  to  compel 


Jesus'  History  33 

Nature  we  can  move  by  prayer  and  make  a  part  of 
our  experience. 

Our  evangelists,  as  we  know,  do  not  tell  us  any- 
thing about  the  history  of  Jesus'  early  develop- 
ment ;  they  tell  us  only  of  his  public  activity:  Two 
of  the  Gospels  do,  it  is  true,  contain  an  introduc- 
tory history  (the  history  of  Jesus'  birth);  but  we 
may  disregard  it ;  for  even  if  it  contained  something 
more  trustworthy  than  it  does  actually  contain,  it 
would  be  as  good  as  useless  for  our  purpose.  That 
is  to  say,  the  evangelists  themselves  never  refer  to 
it,  nor  make  Jesus  himself  refer  to  his  antecedents. 
On  the  contrary,  they  tell  us  that  Jesus'  mother 
and  his  brethren  were  completely  surprised  at  his 
coming  forward,  and  did  not  know  what  to  make  of 
it.  Paul,  too,  is  silent;  so  that  we  can  be  sure  that 
the  oldest  tradition  knew  nothing  of  any  stories  of 
Jesus'  birth. 

We  know  nothing  of  Jesus'  history  for  the  first 
thirty  years  of  his  life.  Is  there  not  a  terrible  un- 
certainty here  ?  What  is  there  left  us  if  we  have  to 
begin  our  task  by  confessing  that  we  are  unable  to 
write  any  life  of  Jesus  ?  How  can  we  write  the  his- 
tory of  a  man  of  whose  development  we  know  no- 
thing, and  with  only  a  year  or  two  of  whose  life  we 
are  acquainted  ?  Now,  however  certain  it  may  be 
that  our  materials  are  insufficient  for  a  "biography," 


34  What  is  Christianity  ? 

they  are  very  weighty  in  other  respects,  and  even 
their  silence  on  the  first  thirty  years  is  instructive. 
They  are  weighty  because  they  give  us  information 
upon  three  important  points:  /;/  the  first  place,  they 
offer  us  a  plain  picture  of  Jesus  teaching,  in  regard 
both  to  its  tnain  features  and  to  its  individual  applica- 
tion ;  in  the  second  place,  they  tell  us  how  his  life  is- 
sued in  the  sendee  of  his  vocation  ;  and  in  the  third 
place,  they  describe  to  us  the  impressioii  which  he  made 
upon  his  disciples,  and  which  they  transmitted. 

These  are,  in  fact,  three  important  points;  nay, 
they  are  the  points  on  which  everything  turns.  It 
is  because  we  can  get  a  clear  view  of  them  that  a 
characteristic  picture  of  Jesus  is  possible;  or,  to 
speak  more  modestly,  that  there  is  some  hope  for 
an  attempt  to  understand  what  his  aims  were, 
what  he  was,  and  what  he  signifies  for  us. 

As  regards  the  thirty  years  of  silence,  we  gather 
from  our  evangelists  that  Jesus  did  not  think  it 
necessary  to  give  his  disciples  any  information 
about  them.  But  much  may  be  said  about  them 
negatively.  First  of  all,  it  is  very  improbable  that 
he  went  through  any  Rabbinical  school ;  he  nowhere 
speaks  like  a  man  who  had  assimilated  any  theo- 
logical culture  of  a  technical  kind,  or  learned  the  art 
of  scholarly  exegesis.  Compare  him  in  this  respect 
with  the  apostle  Paul;  how  clearly  it  can  be  seen 
from  the  latter's  epistles  that  he  had  sat  at  the  feet 


Jesus'  History  35 

of  theological  teachers.  With  Jesus  we  find  no- 
thing of  the  kind ;  and  hence  he  caused  a  stir  by 
appearing  in  the  schools  and  teaching  at  all.  He 
lived  and  had  his  being  in  the  sacred  writings,  but 
not  after  the  manner  of  a  professional  teacher. 

Neither  can  he  have  had  any  relations  with  the 
Essenes,  a  remarkable  order  of  Jewish  monks. 
Were  that  so,  he  would  have  belonged  to  the  pupils 
who  show  their  dependence  on  their  teachers  by 
proclaiming  and  doing  the  opposite  of  what  they 
have  been  taught.  The  Essenes  made  a  point  of 
the  most  extreme  purity  in  the  eye  of  the  law,  and 
held  severely  aloof  not  only  from  the  impure  but 
even  from  those  who  were  a  little  lax  in  their  purity. 
It  is  only  thus  that  we  can  understand  their  living 
strictly  apart,  their  dwelling  in  particular  places, 
and  their  practice  of  frequent  ablutions  every  day. 
Jesus  exhibits  a  complete  contrast  with  this  mode 
of  life :  he  goes  in  search  of  sinners  and  eats  with 
them.  So  fundamental  a  difference  alone  makes  it 
certain  that  he  had  nothing  to  do  with  the  Essenes. 
His  aims  and  the  means  which  he  employed  divide 
him  off  from  them.  If  he  appears  to  coincide  with 
them  in  many  of  his  individual  injunctions  to  his 
disciples,  these  are  accidental  points  of  contact,  as 
his  motives  were  quite  other  than  theirs. 

Further,  unless  all  appearances  are  deceptive,  no 
stormy  crisis,  no  breach  with  his  past,  lies  behind 


36  What  is  Christianity  ? 

the  period  of  Jesus'  life  that  we  know.  In  none  of 
his  sayings  or  discourses,  whether  he  is  threatening 
and  punishing  or  drawing  and  calling  people  to  him 
with  kindness,  whether  he  is  speaking  of  his  relation 
to  the  Father  or  to  the  world,  can  we  discover  the 
signs  of  inner  revolutions  overcome,  or  the  scars  of 
any  terrible  conflict.  Everything  seems  to  pour 
from  him  naturally,  as  though  it  could  not  do  other- 
wise, like  a  spring  from  the  depths  of  the  earth, 
clear  and  unchecked  in  its  flow.  Where  shall  we 
find  the  man  who  at  the  age  of  thirty  can  so  speak, 
if  he  has  gone  through  bitter  struggles — struggles 
of  the  soul,  in  which  he  has  ended  by  burning  what 
he  once  adored,  and  by  adoring  what  he  burned? 
Where  shall  we  find  the  man  who  has  broken  with 
his  past,  in  order  to  summon  others  to  repentance 
as  well  as  himself,  but  who  through  it  all  never 
speaks  of  his  own  repentance  ?  This  consideration 
makes  it  impossible  that  his  life  could  have  been 
spent  in  inner  conflict,  however  little  it  may  have 
been  lacking  in  deep  emotion,  in  temptation  and  in 
doubt. 

One  final  point:  the  picture  of  Jesus'  life  and  his 
discourses  stand  in  no  relation  with  the  Greek  spirit. 
That  is  almost  a  matter  for  surprise ;  for  Galilee  was 
full  of  Greeks,  and  Greek  was  then  spoken  in  many 
of  its  cities,  much  as  Swedish  is  nowadays  in  Fin- 
land.    There  were  Greek  teachers  and  philosophers 


Jesus'  History  37 

there,  and  it  is  scarcely  conceivable  that  Jesus 
should  have  been  entirely  unacquainted  with  their 
language.  But  that  he  was  in  any  way  influenced 
by  them,  that  he  was  ever  in  touch  with  the 
thoughts  of  Plato  or  the  Porch,  even  though  it  may 
have  been  only  in  some  popular  redaction,  it  is  ab- 
solutely impossible  to  maintain.  Of  course  if  re- 
ligious individualism — God  and  the  soul,  the  soul 
and  its  God  ;  if  subjectivism  ;  if  the  full  self-respons- 
ibility of  the  individual ;  if  the  separation  of  the 
religious  from  the  political — if  all  this  is  only  Greek, 
then  Jesus,  too,  stands  within  the  sphere  of  Greek 
development;  then  he,  too,  breathed  the  pure  air 
of  Greece  and  drank  from  the  Greek  spring.  But  it 
cannot  be  proved  that  it  is  only  on  this  one  line, 
only  in  the  Hellenic  people,  that  this  development 
took  place ;  nay,  it  is  rather  the  contrary  that  can 
be  shown;  other  nations  also  advanced  to  similar 
states  of  knowledge  and  feeling;  although  they  did 
so,  it  is  true,  as  a  rule,  only  after  Alexander  the 
Great  had  pulled  down  the  barriers  and  fences  which 
separated  the  peoples.  For  these  nations,  too,  no 
doubt  it  was  in  the  majority  of  cases  the  Greek  ele- 
ment that  was  the  liberating  and  progressive  factor. 
But  I  do  not  believe  that  the  Psalmist  who  uttered 
the  words,  "  Whom  have  I  in  heaven  but  thee  ?  and 
there  is  none  upon  earth  that  I  desire  beside  thee," 
had  ever  heard  anything  of  Socrates  or  of  Plato. 


3^  What  is  Christianity  ? 

Enough :  from  their  silence  on  the  first  thirty 
years  of  Jesus'  life,  and  from  what  the  evangelists 
do  not  tell  us  of  the  period  of  his  activity,  there  are 
important  things  to  be  learnt. 

He  lived  in  religion,  and  it  was  breath  to  him  in 
the  fear  of  God ;  his  whole  life,  all  his  thoughts  and 
feelings,  were  absorbed  in  the  relation  to  God,  and 
yet  he  did  not  talk  like  an  enthusiast  and  a  fanatic, 
who  sees  only  one  red-hot  spot,  and  so  is  blind  to 
the  world  and  all  that  it  contains.  He  spoke  his 
message  and  looked  at  the  world  with  a  fresh  and 
clear  eye  for  the  life,  great  and  small,  that  sur- 
rounded him.  He  proclaimed  that  to  gain  the  whole 
world  was  nothing  if  the  soul  were  injured,  and  yet 
he  remained  kind  and  sympathetic  to  every  living 
thing.  That  is  the  most  astonishing  and  the  great- 
est fact  about  him !  His  discourses,  generally  in 
the  form  of  parables  and  sayings,  exhibit  every  de- 
gree of  human  speech  and  the  whole  range  of  the 
emotions.  The  sternest  tones  of  passionate  accusa- 
tion and  indignant  reproof,  nay,  even  irony,  he  does 
not  despise;  but  they  must  have  formed  the  excep- 
tion with  him.  He  is  possessed  of  a  quiet,  uniform, 
collected  demeanour,  with  everything  directed  to 
one  goal.  He  never  uses  any  ecstatic  language, 
and  the  tone  of  stirring  prophecy  is  rare.  En- 
tusted  with  the  greatest  of  all  missions,  his  eye  and 


Jesus'  Teaching  39 

ear  are  open  to  every  impression  of  the  life  around 
him— a  proof  of  intense  calm  and  absolute  certainty. 

Mourning  and  weeping,  laughing  and  dancing,  wealth 
and  poverty,  hunger  and  thirst,  health  and  sickness, 
children's  play  and  politics,  gathering  and  scattering,  the 
leaving  of  home,  life  in  the  inn  and  the  return,  marriage 
and  funeral,  the  splendid  house  of  the  living  and  the 
grave  of  the  dead,  the  sower  and  the  reaper  in  the  field, 
the  lord  of  the  vintage  among  his  vines,  the  idle  work- 
man in  the  marketplace,  the  shepherd  searching  for  the 
sheep,  the  dealer  in  pearls  on  the  sea,  and,  then  again, 
the  woman  at  home  anxious  over  the  barrel  of  meal  and 
the  leaven,  or  the  lost  piece  of  money,  the  widow's  com- 
plaint to  the  surly  official,  the  earthly  food  that  perishes, 
the  mental  relation  of  teacher  and  pupil,  on  the  one  side 
regal  glory  and  the  tyrant's  lust  of  power,  on  the  other 
childish  innocence  and  the  industry  of  the  servant — all 
these  pictures  enliven  his  discourse  and  make  it  clear 
even  to  those  who  are  children  in  mind. 

They  do  more  than  tell  us  that  he  spoke  in 
picture  and  parable.  They  exhibit  an  inner  free- 
dom and  a  cheerfulness  of  soul  in  the  midst 
of  the  greatest  strain,  such  as  no  prophet  ever 
possessed  before  him.  His  eye  rests  kindly  upon 
the  flowers  and  the  children,  on  the  lily  of  the  field 
— "Solomon  in  all  his  glory  is  not  clothed  like  one 
of  them  " — on  the  birds  in  the  air  and  the  sparrows 
on  the  house-top.  The  sphere  in  which  he  lived, 
above  the  earth  and  its  concerns,  did  not  destroy 
his  interest  in  it;  no!  he  brought  everything  in  it 


40  What  is  Christianity  ? 

into  relation  with  the  God  whom  he  knew,  and  he 
saw  it  as  protected  in  Him  :  "  Your  Father  in  heaven 
feeds  them."  The  parable  is  his  most  familiar  form 
of  speech.  Insensibly,  however,  parable  and  sym- 
pathy pass  into  each  other.  Yet  he  who  had  not 
where  to  lay  his  head  does  not  speak  like  one  who 
has  broken  with  everything,  or  like  an  heroic  peni- 
tent, or  like  an  ecstatic  prophet,  but  like  a  man  who 
has  rest  and  peace  for  his  soul,  and  is  able  to  give 
life  and  strength  to  others.  He  strikes  the  mighti- 
est notes;  he  offers  men  an  inexorable  alternative; 
he  leaves  them  no  escape;  and  yet  the  strongest 
emotion  seems  to  come  naturally  to  him,  and  he 
expresses  it  as  something  natural;  he  clothes  it  in 
the  language  in  which  a  mother  speaks  to  her  child. 


LECTURE   III 

IN  the  previous  lecture  we  spoke  of  our  evangel- 
ists and  of  their  silence  on  the  subject  of  Jesus' 
early  development.  We  described  in  brief  the 
mode  and  character  of  his  teaching.  We  saw  that 
he  spoke  like  a  prophet,  and  yet  not  like  a  prophet. 
His  words  breathe  peace,  joy  and  certainty.  He 
urges  the  necessity  of  struggle  and  decision — 
*'  where  your  treasure  is,  there  will  your  heart  be 
also  " — and  yet  the  quiet  symmetry  of  a  parable  is 
over  all  that  he  says:  under  God's  sun  and  the  dew 
of  heaven  everything  is  to  grow  and  increase  until 
the  harvest.  He  lived  in  the  continual  conscious- 
ness of  God's  presence.  His  food  and  drink  was 
to  do  God's  will.  But  —  and  this  seemed  to  us  the 
greatest  thing  about  him  and  the  seal  of  his  inner 
freedom — he  did  not  speak  like  an  heroic  penitent, 
or  like  an  ascetic  who  has  turned  his  back  upon  the 
world.  His  eye  rested  kindly  upon  the  whole 
world,  and  he  saw  it  as  it  was,  in  all  its  varied  and 
changing  colours.  He  ennobled  it  in  his  parables; 
his  gaze  penetrated  the  veil  of  the  earthly,  and  he 
recognised  everywhere  the  hand  of  the  living  God. 

41 


42  What  is  Christianity  ? 

When  he  came  forward,  another  was  already  at 
work  among  the  Jewish  people:  John  the  Baptist. 
Within  a  few  months  a  great  movement  had  arisen 
on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan.  It  differed  altogether 
from  those  messianic  movements  which  for  several 
generations  had  by  fits  and  starts  kept  the  nation 
alive.  The  Baptist,  it  is  true,  also  proclaimed  that 
the  kingdom  of  God  was  at  hand ;  and  that  meant 
nothing  less  than  that  the  day  of  the  Lord,  the 
judgment,  the  end,  was  then  coming.  But  the  day 
of  judgment  which  John  the  Baptist  announced  was 
not  the  day  when  God  was  going  to  take  vengeance 
upon  the  heathen  and  raise  up  His  own  people;  it 
was  the  day  of  judgment  for  this  very  people  that 
he  prophesied.  "  Who  hath  warned  you  to  flee 
from  the  wrath  to  come?  Think  not  to  say  within 
yourselves.  We  have  Abraham  to  our  father :  for  I 
say  unto  you  that  God  is  able  of  these  stones  to 
raise  up  children  unto  Abraham.  And  now  also  the 
axe  is  laid  unto  the  root  of  the  trees."  In  that  day 
of  judgment  it  is  not  being  children  of  Abraham, 
but  doing  works  of  righteousness,  which  is  to  turn 
the  scale.  And  he,  the  preacher,  himself  began 
with  repentance  and  devoted  his  life  to  it ;  he  stands 
before  them  in  raiment  of  camel's  hair,  and  his  meat 
is  locusts  and  wild  honey.  But  it  is  not  in  the  levy- 
ing of  a  band  of  ascetics  that  he  sees  his  work,  or 
at  any  rate  his  main  work.     He    appeals   to   the 


John  the  Baptist  43 

whole  nation,  busy  with  its  various  trades  and  call- 
ings, and  summons  it  to  repentance.  They  seem 
very  simple  truths  that  he  utters :  to  the  publicans 
he  says:  "Exact  no  more  than  that  which  is  ap- 
pointed you  "  ;  to  the  soldiers:  "Do  violence  to  no 
man,  neither  accuse  any  falsely,  and  be  content 
with  your  wages";  to  the  well-to-do:  "He  that 
hath  two  coats,  let  him  impart  to  him  that  hath 
none,  and  he  that  hath  meat,  let  him  do  likewise  "  ; 
and  to  all:  "Forget  not  the  poor."  This  is  the 
practical  proof  of  the  repentance  to  which  he  calls, 
and  it  embraces  the  conversion  which  he  has  in 
view.  It  is  not  a  question  of  a  single  act,  the  bap- 
tism of  repentance,  but  of  a  righteous  life  in  the 
face  of  the  avenging  justice  of  God.  Of  ceremonies, 
sacrifices,  and  the  works  of  the  law,  John  did  not 
speak;  apparently  he  thought  them  unimportant. 
It  was  on  a  right  disposition  and  good  deeds  that 
everything  turned.  In  the  day  of  judgment  it  was 
by  this  standard  that  the  God  of  Abraham  would 
judge. 

Let  us  pause  here  for  a  moment.  Questions  force 
themselves  upon  us  at  this  point  which  have  often 
been  answered  and  still  are  again  and  again  put.  It 
is  clear  that  John  the  Baptist  proclaimed  the  sov- 
ereignty of  God  and  His  holy  moral  law.  It  is  also 
clear  that  he  proclaimed  to  his  fellow-countrymen 
that  it  was  by  the  moral  lav/  that  they  were  to 


44  What  is  Christianity  ? 

measure,  and  that  on  this  alone  everything  was  to 
turn.  He  told  them  that  what  they  were  to  care 
about  most  was  to  be  in  a  right  state  within  and  to 
do  good  deeds.  It  is  clear,  lastly,  that  there  is  no- 
thing over-refined  or  artificial  in  his  notion  of  what 
was  good ;  he  means  ordinary  morality.  It  is  here 
that  the  questions  arise. 

Firstly:  if  it  was  only  so  simple  a  matter  as  the 
eternal  claims  of  what  is  right  and  holy,  why  all  this 
apparatus  about  the  coming  of  the  day  of  judgment, 
about  the  axe  being  laid  to  the  root  of  the  trees, 
about  the  unquenchable  fire,  and  so  on? 

Secondly :  is  not  this  baptism  in  the  wilderness 
and  this  proclamation  that  the  day  of  judgment  was 
at  hand  simply  the  reflection  or  the  product  of  the 
political  and  social  state  of  the  nation  at  the  time  ? 
Thirdly :  what  is  there  that  is  really  new  in  this 
proclamation  and  had  not  been  already  expressed 
in  Judaism? 

These  three  questions  are  very  intimately  con- 
nected with  one  another. 

Firstly,  then,  as  to  the  whole  dramatic  eschato- 
logical  apparatus  about  the  coming  of  the  kingdom 
of  God,  the  end  being  at  hand,  and  so  on.  Well, 
every  time  that  a  man  earnestly,  and  out  of  the 
depths  of  his  own  personal  experience,  points  others 
to  God  and  to  what  is  good  and  holy,  whether  it  be 
deliverance  or  judgment  that  he  preaches,    it  has 


John  the  Baptist  45 

always,  so  far  as  history  tells  us,  taken  the  form  of 
announcing  that  the  end  is  at  hand.  How  is  that 
to  be  explained  ?  The  answer  is  not  difficult.  Not 
only  is  religion  a  life  in  and  with  God;  but,  just  be- 
cause it  is  that,  it  is  also  the  revelation  of  the  mean- 
ing and  responsibility  of  life.  Everyone  who  has 
awakened  to  a  sense  of  religion  perceives  that,  with- 
out it,  the  search  for  such  meaning  is  in  vain,  and 
that  the  individual,  as  well  as  the  multitude,  wan- 
ders aimlessly  and  falls:  "  they  go  astray  ;  everyone 
turns  to  his  own  way."  But  the  prophet  who  has 
become  conscious  of  God  is  filled  with  terror  and 
agony  as  he  recognises  that  all  mankind  is  sunk  in 
error  and  indifference.  He  feels  like  a  traveller 
who  sees  his  companions  blindly  rushing  to  the 
edge  of  a  precipice.  He  wants  to  call  them  back  at 
all  costs.  The  time  is  running  out;  he  can  still 
warn  them;  he  can  still  adjure  them  to  turn  back; 
in  a  single  hour,  perhaps,  all  will  be  lost.  The  time 
is  running  out,  it  is  the  last  moment — this  is  the  cry 
in  which,  then,  in  all  nations  and  at  all  times,  any 
energetic  call  to  conversion  has  been  voiced  when- 
ever a  fresh  prophet  has  been  granted  them.  The 
prophet's  gaze  penetrates  the  course  of  history; 
he  sees  the  irrevocable  end;  and  he  is  filled 
with  boundless  astonishment  that  the  godlessness 
and  blindness,  the  frivolity  and  indolence,  have  not 
long  since   brought    everything   to  utter  ruin  and 


46  What  is  Christianity  ? 

destruction.  That  there  is  still  a  brief  moment 
left  in  which  conversion  is  possible  seems  to  him 
the  greatest  marvel  of  all,  and  to  be  ascribed  only 
to  God's  forbearance.  But  certain  it  is  that  the  end 
cannot  be  very  far  off.  This  is  the  way  in  which 
with  every  great  cry  for  repentance  the  idea  of  the 
approaching  end  always  arises.  The  individual 
forms  in  which  it  shapes  itself  depend  upon  con- 
temporary circumstances  and  are  of  subordinate 
importance.  It  is  only  the  religion  which  has  been 
built  up  into  an  intellectual  system  that  does  not 
make  this  emphasising  of  the  end  all-important ; 
without  such  emphasis  no  actual  religion  is  conceiv- 
able, whether  it  springs  up  anew  like  a  sudden  flame 
or  glows  in  the  soul  like  a  secret  fire. 

I  pass  now  to  the  second  question :  whether  the 
social  and  political  conditions  of  the  time  were  not 
causes  of  the  religious  movement.  Let  us  see 
briefly  where  we  are.  You  are  aware  that  at  the 
time  of  which  we  speak  the  peaceful  days  of  the 
Jewish  theocracy  were  long  past.  For  two  cent- 
uries blow  had  followed  upon  blow ;  from  the  ter- 
rible days  of  Antiochus  Epiphanes  onwards  the 
nation  had  never  had  any  rest.  The  kingdom  of 
the  Maccabees  had  been  set  up,  and  through  inner 
strife  and  external  foe  had  soon  disappeared  again. 
The  Romans  had  invaded  the  country  and  had  laid 
their  iron  hand  upon  everything.     The  tyranny  of 


John  the  Baptist  47 

that  Edomite  parvenu,  King  Herod,  had  robbed  the 
nation  of  every  pleasure  in  life  and  maimed  it  in  all 
its  members.  So  far  as  human  foresight  went,  it 
looked  as  if  no  improvement  in  its  position  could 
ever  again  be  effected ;  the  lie  seemed  to  be  given 
to  all  the  glorious  old  prophecies;  the  end  appeared 
to  have  come.  How  easy  it  was  at  such  an  epoch  to 
despair  of  all  earthly  things,  and  in  this  despair  to 
renounce  in  utter  distress  what  had  once  passed 
as  the  inseparable  accompaniment  of  the  theocracy. 
How  easy  it  was  now  to  declare  the  earthly  crown, 
political  possessions,  prestige  and  wealth,  strenuous 
effort  and  struggle,  to  be  one  and  all  worthless,  and 
in  place  of  them  to  look  to  heaven  for  a  completely 
new  kingdom,  a  kingdom  for  the  poor,  the  op- 
pressed, the  weak,  and  to  hope  that  their  virtues  of 
gentleness  and  patience  would  receive  a  crown. 
And  if  for  hundreds  of  years  the  national  God  of 
Israel  had  been  undergoing  a  transformation  ;  if  He 
had  broken  in  pieces  the  weapons  of  the  mighty, 
and  derided  the  showy  worship  of  His  priests;  if  He 
had  demanded  righteous  judgment  and  mercy — 
what  a  temptation  there  was  to  proclaim  Him  as  the 
God  who  wills  to  see  His  people  in  misery  that  He 
may  then  bring  them  deliverance!  We  can,  in  fact, 
with  a  few  touches  construct  the  religion  and  its 
hopes  which  seemed  of  necessity  to  result  from  the 
circumstances   of   the    time — a  miserabilism  which 


48  What  is  Christianity  ? 

clings  to  the  expectation  of  a  miraculous  interfer- 
ence on  God's  part,  and  in  the  meantime,  as  it 
were,  wallows  in  wretchedness. 

But  although  the  terrible  circumstances  of  the 
time  certainly  disengaged  and  developed  many 
ideas  of  this  kind,  and  easily  account  for  the  wild 
enterprises  of  the  false  Messiahs  and  the  political 
efforts  of  fanatical  Pharisees,  they  are  very  far  from 
being  sufficient  to  explain  John  the  Baptist's  mes- 
sage. They  do,  indeed,  explain  how  it  was  that 
deliverance  from  earthly  things  was  an  idea  which 
seized  hold  of  wide  circles,  and  that  people  were 
looking  to  God.  Trouble  makes  men  pray.  But 
trouble  in  itself  does  not  give  any  moral  force,  and 
moral  force  was  the  chief  element  in  John  the  Bap- 
tist's message.  In  appealing  to  it,  in  proclaiming 
that  everything  must  be  based  on  morality  and  per- 
sonal responsibility,  he  took  a  higher  point  of  view 
than  the  feeble  piety  of  the  **  poor,"  and  drew  not 
from  time  but  from  eternity. 

It  is  scarcely  a  century  since  Fichte  delivered  his 
memorable  orations  here  in  Berlin,  after  the  terrible 
defeat  which  Germany  had  suffered.  What  did  he 
do  in  these  lectures  ?  In  the  first  place,  he  held  up 
a  mirror  to  the  nation,  and  showed  it  its  sins  and 
their  consequences,  —  frivolity,  godlessness,  self- 
complacency,  infatuation,  weakness.  What  did  he 
do  next?     Did  he  simply  call  them  to  arms?    Arms 


John  the  Baptist  49 

were  just  what  they  were  no  longer  capable  of  bear- 
ing; they  had  been  struck  from  their  powerless 
hands.  It  was  to  repentance  and  to  inward  conver- 
sion that  he  called  them ;  to  God,  and  therefore  to 
the  exertion  of  all  their  moral  force;  to  truth  and 
to  the  Spirit,  so  that  by  the  Spirit  everything  might 
be  made  new.  By  his  powerful  personality,  and  in 
union  with  friends  of  a  like  mind,  he  produced  an 
immense  impression.  He  succeeded  in  opening  up 
once  more  the  choked  fountains  of  our  energy,  be- 
cause he  knew  the  strength  from  which  help  comes 
and  had  drunk  of  the  living  water  himself.  No 
doubt  the  necessities  of  the  time  taught  him  and 
steeled  him ;  but  it  would  be  foolish  and  ridiculous 
to  maintain  that  Fichte's  orations  were  the  product 
of  the  general  woe.  They  are  the  antithesis  of  it. 
Not  otherwise  must  we  think  of  John  the  Baptist's 
message,  and — let  me  say  it  at  once — of  the  mes- 
sage which  Jesus  himself  delivered.  That  they  ap- 
pealed to  those  who  expected  nothing  of  the  world 
or  of  politics — of  John  the  Baptist,  however,  this  is 
not  directly  reported ;  that  they  would  have  no- 
thing to  do  with  those  popular  leaders  who  had  led 
the  people  to  ruin ;  that  they  turned  their  gaze  al- 
together from  earthly  things,  may  also  be  accounted 
for  by  the  circumstances  of  the  time.  But  the 
remedy  which  they  proclaimed  was  no  product  of 
those  circumstances.     Nay,  was  not  calling  people 


50  What  is  Christianity  ? 

to  ordinary  morality  and  expecting  everything  of  it 
bound  to  seem  a  hopeless  enterprise?  And  whence 
came  the  power,  the  inflexible  power,  which  com- 
pelled others?  This  leads  us  to  the  last  of  the  ques- 
tions which  we  have  raised. 

Thirdly,  what  was  there  that  was  new  in  the 
whole  movement?  Was  it  anything  new  to  set  up 
the  sovereignty  of  God,  the  sovereignty  of  the  good 
and  the  holy,  in  opposition  to  all  the  other  elements 
which  had  forced  their  way  into  religion?  Did  John 
the  Baptist,  did  Christ  himself,  bring  in  anything 
that  had  not  been  proclaimed  long  before  ?  Gentle- 
men, the  question  as  to  what  is  new  in  religion  is 
not  a  question  which  is  raised  by  those  who  live  in 
it.  What  is  there  that  can  have  been  "  new,"  see- 
ing that  mankind  existed  so  long  before  Jesus 
Christ  and  had  seen  so  much  in  the  way  of  intelli- 
gence and  knowledge?  Monotheism  had  long  been 
introduced,  and  the  few  possible  types  of  mono- 
theistic religious  fervour  had  long  made  their  ap- 
pearance here  and  there,  and  had  taken  possession 
of  whole  schools,  nay,  of  a  whole  nation.  Can  the 
religious  individualism  of  that  Psalmist  ever  be  sur- 
passed in  depth  and  vigour  who  confessed  :  **  Lord, 
when  I  have  thee,  I  ask  not  after  heaven  and 
earth"?  Can  we  go  beyond  what  Micah  said: 
"  He  hath  showed  thee,  O  man,  what  is  good;  and 
what  doth  the  Lord  require  of  thee  but  to  do  justly 


John  the  Baptist  51 

and  to  love  mercy,  and  to  walk  humbly  with  thy 
God"?  Centuries  had  passed  since  these  words 
were  spoken.  "What  do  you  want  with  your 
Christ?"  we  are  asked,  principally  by  Jewish 
scholars;  **  he  introduced  nothing  new."  I  answer 
with  Wellhausen  :  It  is  quite  true  that  what  Jesus 
proclaimed,  what  John  the  Baptist  expressed  be- 
fore him  in  his  exhortations  to  repentance,  was  also 
to  be  found  in  the  prophets,  and  even  in  the  Jewish 
tradition  of  their  time.  The  Pharisees  themselves 
were  in  possession  of  it;  but  unfortunately  they 
were  in  possession  of  much  else  besides.  With 
them  it  was  weighted,  darkened,  distorted,  rendered 
ineffective  and  deprived  of  its  force,  by  a  thousand 
things  which  they  also  held  to  be  religious  and 
every  whit  as  important  as  mercy  and  judgment. 
They  reduced  ev^erything  to  one  dead  level,  wove 
everything  into  one  fabric ;  the  good  and  holy  was 
only  one  woof  in  a  broad  earthly  warp.  You  ask 
again,  then:  "What  was  there  that  was  new?" 
The  question  is  out  of  place  in  monotheistic  re- 
ligion. Ask  rather:  "  Had  what  was  here  pro- 
claimed any  strength  and  any  vigour?  "  I  answer: 
Take  the  people  of  Israel  and  search  the  whole  his- 
tory of  their  religion ;  take  history  generally,  and 
where  will  you  find  any  message  about  God  and  the 
good  that  was  ever  so  pure  and  so  full  of  strength 
— for  purity  and  strength  go  together — as  we  hear 


52  What  is  Christianity? 

and  read  of  in  the  Gospels  ?  As  regards  purity,  the 
spring  of  hoh'ness  had,  indeed,  long  been  opened; 
but  it  was  choked  with  sand  and  dirt,  and  its  water 
was  polluted.  For  rabbis  and  theologians  to  come 
afterwards  and  distil  this  water,  even  if  they  were 
successful,  makes  no  difference.  But  now  the 
spring  burst  forth  afresh,  and  broke  a  new  way  for 
itself  through  the  rubbish — through  the  rubbish 
which  priests  and  theologians  had  heaped  up  so  as 
to  smother  the  true  element  in  religion ;  for  how 
often  does  it  happen  in  history  that  theology  is 
only  the  instrument  by  which  religion  is  discarded ! 
The  other  element  was  that  of  strength.  Phari- 
saical teachers  had  proclaimed  that  everything  was 
contained  in  the  injunction  to  love  God  and  one's 
neighbour.  They  spoke  excellently;  the  words 
might  have  come  out  of  Jesus'  mouth.  But  what 
was  the  result  of  their  language?  That  the  nation, 
that  in  particular  their  own  pupils,  condemned  the 
man  who  took  the  words  seriously.  All  that  they 
did  was  weak  and,  because  weak,  harmful.  Words 
effect  nothing;  it  is  the  power  of  the  personality 
that  stands  behind  them.  But  he  **  taught  as  one 
having  authority  and  not  as  the  Scribes."  Such 
was  the  impression  of  him  which  his  disciples  re- 
ceived. His  words  became  to  them  **the  words  of 
life,"  seeds  which  sprang  up  and  bore  fruit.  That 
was  what  was  new. 


Jesus'  Message  53 

Some  such  message  John  the  Baptist  had  already 
begun  to  deliver.  He,  too,  had  undoubtedly  placed 
himself  in  opposition  to  the  leaders  of  the  people; 
for  any  man  who  tells  people  to  "  reform,"  and  at 
the  same  time  enjoins  nothing  more  than  repent- 
ance and  good  works,  always  comes  into  opposition 
with  the  official  leaders  of  religion  and  church.  But 
beyond  the  lines  of  the  message  of  repentance  John 
did  not  go. 

Jesus  Christ  then  appeared.  He  first  of  all  ac- 
cepted and  affirmed  the  Baptist's  message  to  its  full 
extent,  and  he  acknowledged  the  Baptist  himself; 
nay,  there  was  no  one  of  whom  he  spoke  in  lan- 
guage of  such  warm  recognition.  Did  not  he  say 
that  among  them  that  were  born  of  women  there 
had  not  arisen  a  greater  than  John  the  Baptist? 
Again  and  again  he  acknowledged  that  his  cause 
began  with  the  Baptist  and  that  he  Avas  his  forerun- 
ner. Nay,  he  had  himself  been  baptised  by  him, 
and  thereby  put  himself  into  the  movement  which 
the  Baptist  began. 

But  he  did  not  rest  there.  When  he  appeared, 
he,  too,  it  is  true,  like  John  proclaimed:  "  Repent, 
for  the  kingdom  of  God  is  at  hand  "  ;  but  his  mes- 
sage became  one  of  joy  as  he  delivered  it.  The 
traditions  about  him  contain  nothing  more  certain 
than  that  his  message  was  an  "evangel,"  and  that 
it  was  felt  to  bring  blessing  and  joy.     With  good 


54  What  is  Christianity  ? 

reason,  therefore,  the  evangelist  Luke  began  his 
narrative  of  Jesus'  public  appearance  with  the  words 
of  the  prophet  Isaiah: — "  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord  is 
up07i  me^  because  he  hath  anointed  me  to  preach  the 
gospel  to  the  poor;  he  hath  sent  me  to  heal  the  broken- 
hearted, to  preach  deliverance  to  the  captives  and  re- 
coveri7ig  of  sight  to  the  blind,  to  set  at  liberty  them 
that  are  bruised,  to  preach  the  acceptable  year  of  the 
Lord.''  Or  in  Jesus'  own  words: — ''Come  unto  7ne 
all  ye  that  labour  and  are  heavy  laden  and  L  will  give 
you  rest.  Take  my  yoke  upon  you,  and  learn  of  me; 
for  1  am  meek  and  lowly  of  heart;  and  ye  shall  find 
rest  unto  your  souls.  For  my  yoke  is  easy  and  7ny 
burden  is  light.''  These  words  dominated  Jesus' 
whole  work  and  message ;  they  contain  the  theme 
of  all  that  he  taught  and  did.  They  make  it  at  once 
obvious  that  in  this  teaching  of  his  he  left  John  the 
Baptist's  message  far  behind.  The  latter,  although 
already  in  silent  conflict  with  the  priests  and  the 
scribes,  did  not  become  a  definite  signal  for  contra- 
diction. **  The  falling  and  the  rising  again,"  a  new 
humanity  opposed  to  the  old,  men  of  God — these 
Jesus  Christ  was  the  first  to  create.  He  came  into 
immediate  opposition  with  the  official  leaders  of  the 
people,  and  in  them  with  ordinary  human  nature  in 
general.  They  thought  of  God  as  of  a  despot 
guarding  the  ceremonial  observances  in  His  house- 
hold ;  he  breathed  in  the  presence  of  God.     They 


Jesus'  Message  55 

saw  Him  only  in  His  law,  which  they  had  converted 
into  a  labyrinth  of  dark  defiles,  blind  alleys,  and 
secret  passages;  he  saw  and  felt  Him  everywhere. 
They  were  in  possession  of  a  thousand  of  His  com- 
mandments, and  thought,  therefore,  that  they  knew 
Him  ;  he  had  one  only,  and  knew  Him  by  it.  They 
had  made  this  religion  into  an  earthly  trade,  and 
there  was  nothing  more  detestable ;  he  proclaimed 
the  living  God  and  the  soul's  nobility. 

If,  however,  we  take  a  general  view  of  Jesus'  teach- 
ing, we  shall  see  that  it  may  be  grouped  under  three 
heads.  They  are  each  of  such  a  nature  as  to  con- 
tain the  whole,  and  hence  it  can  be  exhibited  in  its 
entirety  under  any  one  of  them. 

Firstly,  the  kingdom  of  God  and  its  coming. 

Secondly,  God  the  Father  and  the  hi  finite  value  of 
the  human  soul. 

Thirdly,  the  higher  righteousness  and  tJie  com- 
mandment of  love. 

That  Jesus*  message  is  so  great  and  so  powerful 
lies  in  the  fact  that  it  is  so  simple  and  on  the  other 
hand  so  rich ;  so  simple  as  to  be  exhausted  in  each 
of  the  leading  thoughts  which  he  uttered;  so  rich 
that  every  one  of  these  thoughts  seems  to  be  inex- 
haustible and  the  full  meaning  of  the  sayings  and 
parables  beyond  our  reach.  But  more  than  that — 
he  himself  stands  behind  everything  that  he  said. 
His  words  speak  to  us  across  the  centuries  with  the 


5^  What  is  Christianity  ? 

freshness  of  the  present.  It  is  here  that  that  pro- 
found saying  is  truly  verified:  "  Speak,  that  I  may 
see  thee." 

Our  course  in  what  follows  will  be  to  try  to  learn 
what  those  three  heads  are,  and  to  classify  the 
thoughts  which  come  under  them.  They  contain 
the  main  features  of  Jesus'  message.  We  shall  then 
try  to  understand  the  Gospel  in  its  relations  to  cer- 
tain great  questions  of  life. 

I. — The  kingdom  of  God  and  its  coming. 

Jesus'  message  of  the  kingdom  of  God  runs 
through  all  the  forms  and  statements  of  the 
prophecy  which,  taking  its  colour  from  the  Old 
Testament,  announces  the  day  of  judgment  and  the 
visible  government  of  God  in  the  future,  up  to  the 
idea  of  an  inward  coming  of  the  kingdom,  starting 
with  Jesus'  message  and  then  beginning.  His  mes- 
sage embraces  these  two  poles,  with  many  stages 
between  them  that  shade  off  one  into  another.  At 
the  one  pole  the  coming  of  the  kingdom  seems  to 
be  a  purely  future  event,  and  the  kingdom  itself  to 
be  the  external  rule  of  God;  at  the  other,  it  appears 
as  something  inward,  something  which  is  already 
present  and  making  its  entrance  at  the  moment. 
You  see,  therefore,  that  neither  the  conception  of 
the  kingdom  of  God,  nor  the  way  in  which  its  com- 
ing is  represented,  is  free  from  ambiguity.     Jesus 


The  Kingdom  of  God  57 

took  it  from  the  religious  traditions  of  his  nation, 
where  it  already  occupied  a  foremost  place;  he  ac- 
cepted various  aspects  of  it  in  which  the  conception 
was  still  a  living  force,  and  he  added  new  ones. 
Eudemonistic  expectations  of  a  mundane  and  po- 
litical character  were  all  that  he  discarded. 

Jesus,  like  all  those  of  his  own  nation  who  were 
really  in  earnest,  was  profoundly  conscious  of  the 
great  antithesis  between  the  kingdom  of  God  and 
that  kingdom  of  the  world  in  which  he  saw  the 
reign  of  evil  and  the  evil  one.  This  was  no  mere 
image  or  empty  idea ;  it  was  a  truth  which  he  saw 
and  felt  most  vividly.  He  was  certain,  then,  that 
the  kingdom  of  the  world  must  perish  and  be  de- 
stroyed. But  nothing  short  of  a  battle  can  effect  it. 
With  dramatic  intensity  battle  and  victory  stand 
like  a  picture  before  his  soul,  drawn  in  those  large 
firm  lines  in  which  the  prophets  had  seen  them. 
At  the  close  of  the  drama  he  sees  himself  seated  at 
the  right  hand  of  his  Father,  and  his  twelve  disciples 
on  thrones  judging  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel;  so 
objective  was  this  picture  to  him,  so  completely  in 
harmony  with  the  ideas  of  his  time.  Now  we  may 
take  the  view — and  not  a  few  of  us  take  it — that  in 
these  dramatic  pictures,  with  their  hard  colours  and 
contrasts,  we  have  the  actual  purport  of  Jesus'  mes- 
sage and  the  fundamental  form  which  it  took;  and 
that  all  his  other  statements  of  it  must  be  simply 


58  What  is  Christianity  ? 

regarded  as  secondary.  We  may  say  that  they  are 
all  variations  of  it  more  or  less  edifying,  variations 
which  were  added,  perhaps,  only  by  later  reporters; 
but  that  the  only  positive  factor  is  the  dramatic 
hope  for  the  future.  In  this  view  I  cannot  concur. 
It  is  considered  a  perverse  procedure  in  similar 
cases  to  judge  eminent,  epoch-making  personalities 
first  and  foremost  by  what  they  share  with  their 
contemporaries,  and  on  the  other  hand  to  put  what 
is  great  and  characteristic  in  them  into  the  back- 
ground. The  tendency  as  far  as  possible  to  reduce 
everything  to  one  level,  and  to  efface  what  is  special 
and  individual,  may  spring  in  some  minds  from  a 
praiseworthy  sense  of  truth,  but  it  has  proved  mis- 
leading. More  frequently,  however,  we  get  the 
endeavour,  conscious  or  unconscious,  to  refuse 
greatness  any  recognition  at  all,  and  to  throw  down 
anything  that  is  exalted.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
about  the  fact  that  the  idea  of  the  two  kingdoms,  of 
God  and  of  the  devil,  and  their  conflicts,  and  of  that 
last  conflict  at  some  future  time  when  the  devil, 
long  since  cast  out  of  heaven,  will  be  also  defeated 
on  earth,  was  an  idea  which  Jesus  simply  shared 
with  his  contemporaries.  He  did  not  start  it,  but 
he  grew  up  in  it  and  he  retained  it.  The  other 
view,  however,  that  the  kingdom  of  God  "cometh 
not  with  observation,"  that  it  is  already  here,  was 
his  own. 


The  Kingdom  of  God  59 

For  us,  gentlemen,  to-day,  it  is  difficult  to  recon- 
cile, nay,  it  is  scarcely  possible  to  bridge  over,  such 
an  opposition  as  is  involved,  on  the  one  side  in  a 
dramatic  picture  of  God's  kingdom  existing  in  the 
future,  and  on  the  other  in  the  announcement  that 
"it  is  in  the  midst  of  you,"  a  still  and  mighty 
power  in  the  hearts  of  men.  But  to  understand 
why  it  was  that  with  other  historical  traditions  and 
other  forms  of  culture  no  opposition  was  felt  to 
exist  between  these  views,  nay,  that  both  were  able 
to  exist  side  by  side,  we  must  reflect,  we  must  steep 
ourselves  in  the  history  of  the  past.  I  imagine  that 
a  few  hundred  years  hence  there  will  be  found  to 
exist  in  the  intellectual  ideas  which  we  shall  have 
left  behind  us  much  that  is  contradictory ;  people 
will  wonder  how  we  put  up  with  it.  They  will  find 
much  hard  and  dry  husk  in  what  we  took  for  the 
kernel;  they  will  be  unable  to  understand  how  we 
could  be  so  short-sighted,  and  fail  to  get  a  sound 
grasp  of  what  was  essential  and  separate  it  from  the 
rest.  Some  day  the  knife  will  be  applied  and  pieces 
will  be  cut  away  where  as  yet  we  do  not  feel  the 
slightest  inclination  to  distinguish.  Let  us  hope 
that  then  we  may  find  fair  judges,  who  will  measure 
our  ideas  not  by  what  we  have  unwittingly  taken 
over  from  tradition  and  are  neither  able  nor  called 
upon  to  correct,  but  by  what  was  born  of  our  very 
own,  by  the  changes  and  improvements  v/hich  we 


6o  What  is  Christianity  ? 

have  effected  in  what  was  handed  down  to  us  or  was 
commonly  prevalent  in  our  day. 

Truly  the  historian's  task  of  distinguishing  be- 
tween what  is  traditional  and  what  is  peculiar, 
between  kernel  and  husk,  in  Jesus'  message  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  a  difficult  and  responsible  one. 
How  far  may  we  go?  We  do  not  want  to  rob  this 
message  of  its  innate  character  and  colour;  we  do 
not  want  to  change  it  into  a  pale  scheme  of  ethics. 
On  the  other  hand,  we  do  not  want  to  lose  sight  of 
its  peculiar  character  and  strength,  as  we  should  do 
were  we  to  side  with  those  who  resolve  it  into  the 
general  ideas  prevailing  at  the  time.  The  very  way 
in  which  Jesus  distinguished  between  the  traditional 
elements  —  he  left  out  none  in  which  there  was  a 
spark  of  moral  force,  and  he  accepted  none  which 
encouraged  the  selfish  expectations  of  his  nation — 
this  very  discrimination  teaches  us  that  it  was  from 
a  deeper  knowledge  that  he  spoke  and  taught.  But 
we  possess  testimonies  of  a  much  more  striking 
kind.  If  anyone  wants  to  know  what  the  kingdom 
of  God  and  the  coming  of  it  meant  in  Jesus'  mes- 
sage, he  must  read  and  study  his  parables.  He  will 
then  see  what  it  is  that  is  meant.  The  kingdom  of 
God  comes  by  coming  to  the  individual,  by  enter- 
ing into  his  soul  and  laying  hold  of  it.  True,  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  the  rule  of  God ;  but  it  is  the 
rule  of  the  holy  God  in  the  hearts  of  individuals;  it 


The  Kingdom  of  God  6i 

is  God  Himself  in  His  power.  From  this  point  of  view 
everything  that  is  dramatic  in  the  external  and  his- 
torical sense  has  vanished ;  and  gone,  too,  are  all 
the  external  hopes  for  the  future.  Take  whatever 
parable  you  will,  the  parable  of  the  sower,  of  the 
pearl  of  great  price,  of  the  treasure  buried  in  the 
field — the  word  of  God,  God  Himself,  is  the  king- 
dom. It  is  not  a  question  of  angels  and  devils, 
thrones  and  principalities,  but  of  God  and  the  soul, 
the  soul  and  its  God. 


LECTURE   IV 

WE  last  spoke  of  Jesus'  message  in  so  far  as  it 
proclaimed  the  kingdom  of  God  and  its 
coming.  We  saw  that  it  runs  through  all  the  forms 
in  which  the  prophecy  of  the  day  of  judgment  is 
expressed  in  the  Old  Testament,  up  to  the  idea  of 
an  inward  coming  of  the  kingdom  then  beginning. 
Finally  we  tried  to  show  why  the  latter  idea  is  to 
be  regarded  as  the  dominant  one.  Before  examin- 
ing it  more  closely,  however,  I  should  like  to  draw 
your  attention  to  two  particularly  important  ex- 
pressions of  it,  lying  between  the  extremes  of  the 
"day  of  judgment  "  and  the  "inner  coming." 

In  the  first  of  them,  the  coming  of  the  kingdom 
of  God  signifies  that  the  kingdom  of  the  devil  is  de- 
stroyed and  the  demons  vanquished.  Hitherto  it  is 
they  who  have  been  ruling;  they  have  taken  pos- 
session of  men  and  even  of  whole  nations,  and 
forced  them  to  their  will.  Jesus  not  only  declares 
that  he  is  come  to  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil, 
but  he  actually  drives  out  the  demons  and  releases 
men  from  their  power. 

Let    me   here  digress  a  little   from  our  subject. 

62 


The  Kingdom  of  God  63 

Nothing  in  the  Gospels  strikes  us  as  stranger  than 
the  frequently  recurring  stories  of  demons,  and  the 
great  importance  which  the  evangelists  attach  to 
them.  For  many  among  us  the  very  fact  that  these 
writings  report  such  absurdities  is  sufficient  reason 
for  declining  to  accept  them.  Now  in  this  con- 
nexion it  is  well  to  know  that  absolutely  similar 
stories  are  to  be  found  in  numerous  writings  of  that 
age,  Greek,  Roman,  and  Jewish.  The  notion  of 
people  being  "  possessed  "  was  current  everywhere; 
nay,  even  the  science  of  the  time  looked  upon  a 
whole  section  of  morbid  phenomena  in  this  light. 
But  the  consequence  of  these  phenomena  being  ex- 
plained as  meaning  that  some  evil  and  invisible 
power  had  taken  possession  of  a  man  was  that  men- 
tal affections  took  forms  which  looked  as  if  an  alien 
being  had  really  entered  into  the  soul.  There  is 
nothing  paradoxical  in  this.  If  modern  science  were 
to  declare  nervous  disease  to  consist,  in  great  part, 
of  "  possession,"  and  the  newspapers  were  to  spread 
this  announcement  amongst  the  public,  the  same 
thing  would  recur.  We  should  soon  have  numer- 
ous cases  in  which  nervous  patients  looked  as  if  they 
were  in  the  grip  of  an  evil  spirit  and  themselves  be- 
lieved that  they  were  so.  Theory  and  belief  would 
work  by  suggestion  and  again  create  a  class  of  "de- 
moniacs "  amongst  the  insane,  just  as  they  created 
them  hundreds,  nay,  thousands,  of  years  ago.     It  is 


64  What  is  Christianity  ? 

unhistorical  and  foolish  to  attribute  any  peculiar 
notion  or  "theory"  about  demons  and  the  de- 
moniac to  the  Gospels  and  the  evangelists.  They 
only  shared  the  general  notions  of  their  time.  The 
forms  of  mental  disease  in  question  are  of  rare  oc- 
currence nowadays,  but  nevertheless  they  are  not 
yet  quite  extinct.  Where  they  occur  the  best 
means  of  encountering  them  is  to-day,  as  it  was 
formerly,  the  influence  of  a  strong  personality.  It 
manages  to  threaten  and  subdue  the  "devil"  and 
so  heal  the  patient.  In  Palestine  "demoniacs" 
must  have  been  particularly  numerous.  Jesus  saw 
in  them  the  forces  of  evil  and  mischief,  and  by  his 
marvellous  power  over  the  souls  of  those  who 
trusted  him  he  banished  the  disease.  This  brings 
us  to  the  second  point. 

When  John  the  Baptist  in  prison  was  disturbed 
by  doubts  as  to  whether  Jesus  was  "  he  who  was  to 
come,"  he  sent  two  of  his  own  disciples  to  him  to 
ask  him  himself.  There  is  nothing  more  touching 
than  this  question  of  the  Baptist's,  nothing  more 
edifying  than  the  Lord's  answer.  But  we  will  not 
dwell  upon  the  scene.  What  was  the  answer? 
"Go  and  shew  John  again  those  things  which  you 
do  hear  and  see :  the  blind  receive  their  sight,  and 
the  lame  walk,  the  lepers  are  cleansed,  and  the  deaf 
hear,  the  dead  are  raised  up,  and  the  poor  have  the 
Gospel    preached    to    them."      That    is   what    the 


The  Kingdom  of  God  65 

"coming  of  the  kingdom"  means,  or,  rather,  it  is 
there  already  in  this  saving  activity.  By  vanquish- 
ing and  banishing  misery,  need  and  disease,  by  the 
actual  influence  which  Jesus  was  exerting,  John  was 
to  see  that  a  new  day  had  dawned.  The  healing 
of  the  possessed  was  only  a  part  of  this  saving  ac- 
tivity ;  the  activity  itself,  however,  was  what  Jesus 
denoted  as  the  meaning  and  the  seal  of  his  mission. 
It  was,  then,  to  the  wretched,  to  the  sick,  and  to 
the  poor,  that  he  addressed  himself;  but  not  as  a 
moralist  and  without  any  trace  of  weak-minded 
sentimentality.  He  makes  no  division  of  evils  into 
departments  and  groups ;  he  spends  no  time  in  ask- 
ing whether  the  sick  one  "  deserves  "  to  be  healed ; 
he  is  far,  too,  from  having  any  sympathy  for  pain 
and  death.  He  nowhere  says  that  disease  is  salu- 
tary and  that  evil  is  a  blessing.  No!  disease  he 
calls  disease,  and  health  he  calls  health.  To  him  all 
evil,  all  misery,  is  something  terrible;  it  is  part  of 
the  great  realm  of  Satan.  But  he  feels  the  power 
of  the  Saviour  within  him.  He  knows  that  progress 
is  possible  only  by  overcoming  weakness  and  heal- 
ing disease. 

But  he  goes  further.  It  is  by  his  healing,  above 
all  by  his  forgiving  sin,  that  the  kingdom  of  God 
comes.  This  is  the  first  complete  transition  to  the 
conception  of  the  kingdom  of  God  as  the  power  that 

works  inwardly.     As  he  calls  the  sick  and  the  poor 
5 


66  What  is  Christianity  ? 

to  him,  so  he  calls  sinners  also,  and  it  is  this  call 
which  is  all-important.  "  The  Son  of  Man  is  come 
to  seek  and  to  save  that  which  was  lost."  Here  for 
the  first  time  everything  that  is  external  and  merely 
future  is  abandoned :  it  is  the  individual,  not  the 
nation  or  the  state,  which  is  redeemed ;  it  is  new 
men  who  are  to  arise,  and  the  kingdom  of  God  is  to 
be  at  once  their  strength  and  the  goal  at  which 
they  aim.  They  search  for  the  treasure  hidden  in 
the  field  and  find  it ;  they  sell  all  that  they  have  and 
buy  the  pearl  of  great  price ;  they  are  converted  and 
become  as  children  ;  but  thereby  they  are  redeemed 
and  made  God's  children  and  God's  champions. 

It  was  in  this  connexion  that  Jesus  spoke  of  the 
kingdom  of  God  which  the  violent  take  by  force, 
and,  again,  of  the  kingdom  of  God  which  grows 
steadily  and  silently  like  a  seed  and  bears  fruit.  It 
is  in  the  nature  of  spiritual  force,  a  power  which 
sinks  into  a  man  within,  and  can  be  understood  only 
from  within.  Thus,  although  the  kingdom  is  also 
in  heaven ;  although  it  will  come  with  the  day  of 
judgment,  he  can  still  say  of  it :  "It  is  not  here  or 
there,  it  is  within  you." 

At  a  later  period  the  view  of  the  kingdom,  ac- 
cording to  which  it  was  already  come  and  still 
comes  in  Jesus'  saving  activity,  was  not  kept  up  by 
his  disciples :  nay,  they  continued  to  speak  of  it  as 
of  something  that  was  solely  in  the  future.    But  the 


The  Kingdom  of  God  67 

thing  itself  retained  its  force ;  it  was  only  given  an- 
other title.  It  underwent  the  same  experience  as 
the  conception  of  the  "Messiah."  As  we  shall  see 
hereafter,  there  was  scarcely  anyone  in  the  Church 
of  the  Gentiles  who  sought  to  explain  Jesus'  signifi- 
cance by  regarding  him  as  the  "Messiah."  But 
the  thing  itself  did  not  perish. 

The  essential  elements  in  the  message  of  the 
kingdom  were  preserved.  The  kingdom  has  a 
triple  meaning.  Firstly,  it  is  something  supernat- 
ural, a  gift  from  above,  not  a  product  of  ordinary 
life.  Secondly,  it  is  a  purely  religious  blessing,  the 
inner  link  with  the  living  God ;  thirdly,  it  is  the 
most  important  experience  that  a  man  can  have, 
that  on  which  everything  else  depends;  it  perme- 
ates and  dominates  his  whole  existence,  because  sin 
is  forgiven  and  misery  banished. 

This  kingdom,  which  comes  to  the  humble  and 
makes  them  new  men  and  joyful,  is  the  key  that 
first  unlocks  the  meaning  and  the  aim  of  life.  This 
was  what  Jesus  himself  found,  and  what  his  dis- 
ciples found.  It  is  a  supernatural  element  alone 
that  ever  enables  us  to  get  at  the  meaning  of  life ; 
for  natural  existence  ends  in  death.  But  a  life  that 
is  bound  up  with  death  can  have  no  meaning;  it  is 
only  sophisms  that  can  blind  us  to  this  fact.  But 
here  the  kingdom  of  God,  the  Eternal,  entered  into 
time.      "Eternal  light  came  in  and  made  the  world 


68  What  is  Christianity  ? 

look  new."  This  is  Jesus'  message  of  the  kingdom. 
Everything  else  that  he  proclaimed  can  be  brought 
into  connexion  with  this;  his  whole  "doctrine" 
can  be  conceived  as  a  message  of  the  kingdom. 
But  we  shall  recognise  this,  and  the  blessing  which 
he  means,  still  more  clearly,  if  we  turn  to  the  sec- 
ond of  the  sections  indicated  in  the  previous  lec- 
ture, and  thereby  progressively  acquaint  ourselves 
with  the  fundamental  features  of  Jesus'  message. 

II. — God  the  Father  and  the  infinite  value  of  the 
human   soul. 

To  our  modern  way  of  thinking  and  feeling, 
Christ's  message  appears  in  the  clearest  and  most 
direct  light  when  grasped  in  connexion  with  the 
idea  of  God  the  Father  and  the  infinite  value  of  the 
human  soul.  Here  the  elements  which  I  would  de- 
scribe as  the  restful  and  restgiving  in  Jesus'  mes- 
sage, and  which  are  comprehended  in  the  idea  of 
our  being  children  of  God,  find  expression.  I  call 
them  restful  in  contrast  with  the  impulsive  and  stir- 
ring elements;  although  it  is  just  they  that  are  in- 
formed with  a  special  strength.  But  the  fact  that 
the  whole  of  Jesus'  message  may  be  reduced  to 
these  two  heads — God  as  the  Father,  and  the  human 
soul  so  ennobled  that  it  can  and  does  unite  with  him 
— shows  us  that  the  Gospel  is  in  nowise  a  positive 
religion  like  the  rest ;  that  it  contains  no  statutory 


God  the  Father  69 

or  particularistic  elements;  that  it  is,  therefore,  re- 
ligion itself.  It  is  superior  to  all  antithesis  and 
tension  between  this  world  and  a  world  to  come, 
between  reason  and  ecstasy,  between  work  and  iso- 
lation from  the  world,  between  Judaism  and  Hel- 
lenism. It  can  dominate  them  all,  and  there  is  no 
factor  of  earthly  life  to  which  it  is  confined  or 
necessarily  tied  down.  Let  us,  however,  get  a 
clearer  idea  of  what  being  children  of  God,  in  Jesus' 
sense,  means,  by  briefly  considering  four  groups 
containing  sayings  of  his,  or,  as  the  case  may  be,  a 
single  saying,  viz.  : — (i)  The  Lord's  Prayer;  (2)  that 
utterance,  "Rejoice  not  that  the  spirits  are  subject 
unto  you;  but  rather  rejoice  because  your  names 
are  written  in  heaven";  (3)  the  saying,  "Are  not 
two  sparrows  sold  for  a  farthing  ?  and  one  of  them 
shall  not  fall  on  the  ground  without  your  Father. 
But  the  very  hairs  of  your  head  are  all  numbered  "  ; 
(4)  the  utterance,  "What  shall  it  profit  a  man  if  he 
shall  gain  the  whole  world  and  lose  his  own  soul "  ? 
Let  us  take  the  Lord's  Prayer  first.  It  was  com- 
municated by  Jesus  to  his  disciples  at  a  particularly 
solemn  moment.  They  had  asked  him  to  teach 
them  how  to  pray,  as  John  the  Baptist  had  taught 
his  disciples.  Thereupon  he  uttered  the  Lord's 
Prayer.  It  is  by  their  prayers  that  the  character  of 
the  higher  religions  is  determined.  But  this  prayer 
was  spoken — as  everyone  must  feel  who  has  ever 


70  What  is  Christianity  ? 

given  it  a  thought  in  his  soul — by  one  who  has 
overcome  all  inner  unrest,  or  overcomes  it  the  mo- 
ment that  he  goes  before  God.  The  very  apos- 
trophe of  the  prayer,  ''Our  Father,"  exhibits  the 
steady  faith  of  the  man  who  knows  that  he  is  safe 
in  God,  and  it  tells  us  that  he  is  certain  of  being 
heard.  Not  to  hurl  violent  desires  at  heaven  or  to 
obtain  this  or  that  earthly  blessing  does  he  pray, 
but  to  preserve  the  power  which  he  already  pos- 
sesses and  strengthen  the  union  with  God  in  which 
he  lives.  No  one,  then,  can  utter  this  prayer  unless 
his  heart  is  in  profound  peace  and  his  mind  wholly 
concentrated  on  the  inner  relation  of  the  soul  with 
God.  All  other  prayers  are  of  a  lower  order,  for 
they  contain  particularistic  elements,  or  are  so 
framed  that  in  some  way  or  other  they  stir  the  im- 
agination in  regard  to  the  things  of  sense  as  well ; 
whilst  this  prayer  leads  us  away  from  everything 
to  the  height  where  the  soul  is  alone  with  its  God. 
And  yet  the  earthly  element  is  not  absent.  The 
whole  of  the  second  half  of  the  prayer  deals  with 
earthly  relations,  but  they  are  placed  in  the  light  of 
the  Eternal.  In  vain  will  you  look  for  any  request 
for  particular  gifts  of  grace,  or  special  blessings, 
even  of  a  spiritual  kind.  "All  else  shall  be  added 
unto  you."  The  name  of  God,  His  will,  and  His 
kingdom — these  elements  of  rest  and  permanence 
are  poured  out  over  the  earthly  relations  as  well. 


God  the  Father  71 

Everything  that  is  small  and  selfish  melts  away,  and 
only  four  things  are  left  with  regard  to  which  it  is 
worth  while  to  pray — the  daily  bread,  the  daily 
trespass,  the  daily  temptations,  and  the  evil  in  life. 
There  is  nothing  in  the  Gospels  that  tells  us  more 
certainly  what  the  Gospel  is,  and  what  sort  of  dis- 
position and  temper  it  produces,  than  the  Lord's 
Prayer.  With  this  prayer  we  ought  also  to  confront 
all  those  who  disparage  the  Gospel  by  representing 
it  as  an  ascetic  or  ecstatic  or  sociological  pronounce- 
ment. It  shows  the  Gospel  to  be  the  Fatherhood 
of  God  applied  to  the  whole  of  life ;  to  be  an  inner 
union  with  God's  will  and  God's  kingdom,  and  a 
joyous  certainty  of  the  possession  of  eternal  bless- 
ings and  protection  from  evil. 

As  to  the  second  utterance:  when  Jesus  says 
"Rejoice  not  that  the  spirits  are  subject  unto  you, 
but  rejoice  rather  that  your  names  are  written  in 
heaven,"  it  is  another  way  of  laying  special  empha- 
sis on  the  idea  that  the  all-important  element  in 
this  religion  is  the  consciousness  of  being  safe  in 
God.  The  greatest  achievements,  nay,  the  very 
works  which  are  done  in  the  strength  of  this  re- 
ligion, fall  below  the  assurance,  at  once  humble  and 
proud,  of  resting  for  time  and  eternity  under  the 
fatherly  care  of  God.  Moreover,  the  genuineness, 
nay,  the  actual  existehce,  of  religious  experience  is 
to  be  measured,  not  by  any  transcendency  of  feeling 


72  What  is  Christianity  ? 

nor  by  great  deeds  that  all  men  can  see,  but  by  the 
joy  and  the  peace  which  are  diffused  through  the 
soul  that  can  say  *'My  Father." 

How  far  did  Christ  carry  this  idea  of  the  fatherly 
providence  of  God?  Here  we  come  to  the  third 
saying:  "Are  not  two  sparrows  sold  for  a  farthing? 
and  one  of  them  shall  not  fall  to  the  ground  with- 
out your  Father.  But  the  very  hairs  of  your  head 
are  all  numbered."  The  assurance  that  God  rules 
is  to  go  as  far  as  our  fears  go,  nay,  as  far  as  life 
itself — life  down  even  to  its  smallest  manifestations 
in  the  order  of  Nature.  It  was  to  disabuse  his  dis- 
ciples of  the  fear  of  evil  and  the  terrors  of  death 
that  he  gave  them  the  sayings  about  the  sparrows 
and  the  flowers  of  the  field ;  they  are  to  learn  how 
to  see  the  hand  of  the  living  God  everywhere  in  life, 
and  in  death  too. 

Finally,  in  asking — and  after  what  has  gone  be- 
fore the  question  will  not  sound  surprising — **  What 
shall  it  profit  a  man  if  he  shall  gain  the  whole  world 
and  lose  his  own  soul  ?  "  he  put  a  man's  value  as 
high  as  it  can  be  put.  The  man  who  can  say  "My 
Father"  to  the  Being  who  rules  heaven  and  earth, 
is  thereby  raised  above  heaven  and  earth,  and  him- 
self has  a  value  which  is  higher  than  all  the  fabric 
of  this  world.  But  this  great  saying  took  the  stern 
tone  of  a  warning.  He  offered  them  a  gift  and  with 
it  set  them  a  task.     How  different  was  the  Greek 


God  the  Father  jz 

doctrine!  Plato,  it  is  true,  had  already  sung  the 
great  hymn  of  the  mind ;  he  had  distinguished  it 
from  the  whole  world  of  appearance  and  maintained 
its  eternal  origin.  But  the  mind  which  he  meant 
was  the  knowing  mind ;  he  contrasted  it  with  blind, 
insensible  matter;  his  message  made  its  appeal  to 
the  wise.  Jesus  Christ  calls  to  every  poor  soul;  he 
calls  to  everyone  who  bears  a  human  face :  You  are 
children  of  the  living  God,  and  not  only  better  than 
many  sparrows  but  of  more  value  than  the  whole 
world.  The  value  of  a  truly  great  man,  as  I  saw  it 
put  lately,  consists  in  his  increasing  the  value  of  all 
mankind.  It  is  here,  truly,  that  the  highest  signifi- 
cance of  great  men  lies :  to  have  enhanced,  that  is, 
to  have  progressively  given  effect  to  human  value, 
to  the  value  of  that  race  of  men  which  has  risen  up 
out  of  the  dull  ground  of  Nature.  But  Jesus  Christ 
was  the  first  to  bring  the  value  of  every  human  soul 
to  light,  and  what  he  did  no  one  can  any  more 
undo.  We  may  take  up  what  relation  to  him  we 
will :  in  the  history  of  the  past  no  one  can  refuse  to 
recognise  that  it  was  he  who  raised  humanity  to 
this  level. 

This  highest  estimate  of  a  man's  value  is  based 
on  a  transvaluation  of  all  values.  To  the  man  who 
boasts  of  his  possessions  he  says:  "  Thou  fool." 
He  confronts  everyone  with  the  thought:  "Who- 
soever will  lose  his  life  shall  save  it."     He  can  even 


74  What  is  Christianity  ? 

say:  "  He  that  hateth  his  life  in  this  world  shall 
keep  it  unto  life  eternal,"  This  is  the  transvalua- 
tion  of  values  of  which  many  before  him  had  a  dim 
idea;  of  which  they  perceived  the  truth  as  through 
a  veil ;  the  redeeming  power  of  which — that  blessed 
mystery — they  felt  in  advance.  He  was  the  first 
to  give  it  calm,  simple,  and  fearless  expression,  as 
though  it  were  a  truth  which  grew  on  every  tree. 
It  was  just  this  that  stamped  his  peculiar  genius, 
that  he  gave  perfectly  simple  expression  to  pro- 
found and  all-important  truths,  as  though  they 
could  not  be  otherwise ;  as  though  he  were  uttering 
something  that  was  self-evident;  as  though  he  were 
only  reminding  men  of  what  they  all  know  already, 
because  it  lives  in  the  innermost  part  of  their  souls. 
In  the  combination  of  these  ideas  —  God  the 
Father,  Providence,  the  position  of  men  as  God's 
children,  the  infinite  value  of  the  human  soul — the 
whole  Gospel  is  expressed.  But  we  must  recognise 
what  a  paradox  it  all  is ;  nay,  that  the  paradox  of 
religion  here  for  the  first  time  finds  its  full  expres- 
sion. Measured  by  the  experience  of  the  senses 
and  by  exact  knowledge,  not  only  are  the  different 
religions  a  paradox,  but  so  are  all  religious  phe- 
nomena. They  introduce  an  element,  and  pro- 
nounce it  to  be  the  most  important  of  all,  which  is 
not  cognisable  by  the  senses  and  flies  in  the  face  of 
things  as  they  are  actually  constituted.     But  all  re- 


God  the  Father  75 

ligions  other  than  Christianity  are  in  some  way  or 
other  so  bound  up  with  the  things  of  the  world  that 
they  involve  an  element  of  earthly  advantage,  or,  as 
the  case  may  be,  are  akin  in  their  substance  to  the 
intellectual  and  spiritual  condition  of  a  definite 
epoch.  But  what  can  be  less  obvious  than  the 
statement :  the  hairs  of  your  head  are  all  numbered  ; 
you  have  a  supernatural  value;  you  can  put  your- 
selves into  the  hands  of  a  power  which  no  one  has 
seen?  Either  that  is  nonsense,  or  else  it  is  the 
utmost  development  of  which  religion  is  capable; 
no  longer  a  mere  phenomenon  accompanying  the 
life  of  the  senses,  a  coefficient,  a  transfiguration  of 
certain  parts  of  that  life,  but  something  which  sets 
up  a  paramount  title  to  be  the  first  and  the  only 
fact  that  reveals  the  fundamental  basis  and  mean- 
ing of  life.  Religion  subordinates  to  itself  the 
whole  motley  world  of  phenomena,  and  defies  that 
world  if  it  claims  to  be  the  only  real  one.  Religion 
gives  us  only  a  single  experience,  but  one  which 
presents  the  world  in  a  new  light :  the  Eternal  ap- 
pears; time  becomes  means  to  an  end;  man  is  seen 
to  be  on  the  side  of  the  Eternal.  This  was  certainly 
Jesus'  meaning,  and  to  take  anything  from,  it  is  to 
destroy  it.  In  applying  the  idea  of  Providence  to 
the  whole  of  humanity  and  the  world  without  any 
exception ;  in  showing  that  humanity  is  rooted  in 
the    Eternal;    in  proclaiming  the  fact  that  we  are 


76  What  is  Christianity  ? 

God's  children  as  at  once  a  gift  and  a  task,  he  took 
a  firm  grip  of  all  fumbling  and  stammering  attempts 
at  religion  and  brought  them  to  their  issue.  Once 
more  let  it  be  said :  we  may  assume  what  position 
we  will  in  regard  to  him  and  his  message,  certain 
it  is  that  thence  onward  the  value  of  our  race  is  en- 
hanced; human  lives,  nay,  we  ourselves,  have  be- 
come dearer  to  one  another.  A  man  may  know  it 
or  not,  but  a  real  reverence  for  humanity  follows 
from  the  practical  recognition  of  God  as  the  Father 
of  us  all. 

III. —  The  higher  righteousness   and  the  command- 
ment  of  love. 

This  is  the  third  head,  and  the  whole  of  the  Gos- 
pel is  embraced  under  it.  To  represent  the  Gospel 
as  an  ethical  message  is  no  depreciation  of  its  value. 
The  ethical  system  which  Jesus  found  prevailing  in 
his  nation  was  both  ample  and  profound.  To  judge 
the  moral  ideas  of  the  Pharisees  solely  by  their 
childish  and  casuistical  aspects  is  not  fair.  By  be- 
ing bound  up  with  religious  worship  and  petrified  in 
ritual  observance,  the  morality  of  holiness  had,  in- 
deed, been  transformed  into  something  that  was  the 
clean  opposite  of  it.  But  all  was  not  yet  hard  and 
dead;  there  was  some  life  still  left  in  the  deeper 
parts  of  the  system.  To  those  who  questioned  him 
Jesus  could  still  answer:  *'You  have  the  law,  keep 


The  Higher  Righteousness         ll 

it;  you  know  best  youselves  what  you  have  to  do; 
the  sum  of  the  law  is,  as  you  yourselves  say,  to  love 
God  and  your  neighbour."  Nevertheless,  there  is 
a  sphere  of  ethical  thought  which  is  peculiarly  ex- 
pressive of  Jesus'  Gospel.  Let  us  make  this  clear  by 
citing  four  points. 

Firstly :  Jesus  severed  the  connexion  existing  in 
his  day  between  ethics  and  the  external  forms  of 
religious  worship  and  technical  observance.  He 
would  have  absolutely  nothing  to  do  with  the  pur- 
poseful and  self-seeking  pursuit  of  "good  works" 
in  combination  with  the  ritual  of  worship.  He  ex- 
hibited an  indignant  contempt  for  those  who  allow 
their  neighbours,  nay,  even  their  parents,  to  starve, 
and  on  the  other  hand  send  gifts  to  the  temple. 
He  will  have  no  compromise  in  the  matter.  Love 
and  mercy  are  ends  in  themselves;  they  lose  all 
value  and  are  put  to  shame  by  having  to  be  any- 
thing else  than  the  service  of  one's  neighbour. 

Secondly:  in  all  questions  of  morality  he  goes 
straight  to  the  root,  that  is,  to  the  disposition  and 
the  intention.  It  is  only  thus  that  what  he  calls 
the  "higher  righteousness"  can  be  understood. 
The  "higher  righteousness"  is  the  righteousness 
that  will  stand  when  the  depths  of  the  heart  are 
probed.  Here,  again,  we  have  something  that  is 
seemingly  very  simple  and  self-evident.  Yet  the 
truth,  as  he  uttered  it,  took  the  severe  form:  "It 


yS  What  is  Christianity  ? 

was  said  of  old  .  .  .  but  I  say  unto  you." 
After  all,  then,  the  truth  was  something  new;  he 
was  aware  that  it  had  never  yet  been  expressed  in 
such  a  consistent  form  and  with  such  claims  to  su- 
premacy. A  large  portion  of  the  so-called  Sermon 
on  the  Mount  is  occupied  with  what  he  says  when 
he  goes  in  detail  through  the  several  departments  of 
human  relationships  and  human  failings  so  as  to 
bring  the  disposition  and  intention  to  light  in  each 
case,  to  judge  a  man's  works  by  them,  and  on  them 
to  hang  heaven  and  hell. 

Thirdly :  what  he  freed  from  its  connexion  with 
self-seeking  and  ritual  elements,  and  recognised  as 
the  moral  principle,  he  reduces  to  one  root  and  to 
one  motive — love.  He  knows  of  no  other,  and  love 
itself,  whether  it  takes  the  form  of  love  of  one's 
neighbour  or  of  one's  enemy,  or  the  love  of  the 
Samaritan,  is  of  one  kind  only.  It  must  completely 
fill  the  soul ;  it  is  what  remains  when  the  soul  dies 
to  itself.  In  this  sense  of  love  is  the  new  life  al- 
ready begun.  But  it  is  always  the  love  which  serves^ 
and  only  in  this  function  does  it  exist  and  live. 

Fourthly:  we  saw  that  Jesus  freed  the  moral  ele- 
ment from  all  alien  connexions,  even  from  its  alli- 
ance with  the  public  religion.  Therefore  to  say  that 
the  Gospel  is  a  matter  of  ordinary  morality  is  not  to 
misunderstand  him.  And  yet  there  is  one  all-im- 
portant point  where  he  combines  religion  and  mor- 


The  Higher  Righteousness         79 

ality.  It  is  a  point  which  must  be  felt ;  it  is  not 
easy  to  define.  In  view  of  the  Beatitudes  it  may, 
perhaps,  best  be  described  as  humility.  Jesus  made 
love  and  humility  orle.  Humility  is  not  a  virtue  by 
itself;  but  it  is  pure  receptivity,  the  expression  of 
inner  need,  the  prayer  for  God's  grace  and  forgive- 
ness, in  a  word,  the  opening  up  of  the  heart  to  God. 
In  Jesus'  view,  this  humility,  which  is  the  love  of 
God  of  which  we  are  capable — take,  for  instance, 
the  parable  of  the  Pharisee  and  the  publican — is  an 
abiding  disposition  towards  the  good,  and  that  out 
of  which  everything  that  is  good  springs  and  grows. 
"Forgive  us  our  trespasses  even  as  we  forgive  them 
that  trespass  against  us"  is  the  prayer  at  once  of 
humility  and  of  love.  This,  then,  is  the  source  and 
origin  of  the  love  of  one's  neighbour;  the  poor  in 
spirit  and  those  who  hunger  and  thirst  after  right- 
eousness are  also  the  peacemakers  and  the  merciful. 

It  was  in  this  sense  that  Jesus  combined  religion 
and  morality,  and  in  this  sense  religion  may  be 
called  the  soul  of  morality,  and  morality  the  body 
of  religion.  We  can  thus  understand  how  it  was 
that  Jesus  could  place  the  love  of  God  and  the  love 
of  one's  neighbour  side  by  side;  the  love  of  one's 
neighbour  is  the  only  practical  proof  on  earth  of 
that  love  of  God  which  is  strong  in  humility. 

In  thus  expressing  his  message  of  the  higher 
righteousness  and  the  new  commandment  of  love  in 


8o  What  is  Christianity  ? 

these  four  leading  thoughts,  Jesus  defined  the 
sphere  of  the  ethical  in  a  way  in  which  no  one  be- 
fore him  had  ever  defined  it.  But  should  we  be 
threatened  with  doubts  as  to  what  he  meant,  we 
must  steep  ourselves  again  and  again  in  the  Beati- 
tudes of  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount.  They  contain 
his  ethics  and  his  religion,  united  at  the  root,  and 
freed  from  all  external  and  particularistic  elements. 


LECTURE   V 

AT  the  close  of  the  last  lecture  I  referred  to  the 
Beatitudes,  and  mentioned  that  they  exhibit 
Jesus'  religion  in  a  particularly  impressive  way.  I 
desire  to  remind  you  of  another  passage  which 
shows  that  Jesus  recognised  the  practical  proof  of 
religion  to  consist  in  the  exercise  of  neighbourly 
love  and  mercy.  In  one  of  his  last  discourses  he 
spoke  of  the  Judgment,  bringing  it  before  his 
hearers'  eyes  in  the  parable  of  the  shepherd  sepa- 
rating the  sheep  from  the  goats.  The  sole  principle 
of  separation  is  the  question  of  mercy.  The  ques- 
tion is  raised  by  asking  whether  men  gave  food  and 
drink  to  Jesus  himself,  and  visited  him ;  that  is  to 
say,  it  is  put  as  a  religious  question.  The  paradox 
is  then  resolved  in  the  sentence:  "Inasmuch  as  )/e 
have  done  it  unto  one  of  the  least  of  these  my 
brethren,  ye  have  done  it  unto  me."  We  can  have 
no  clearer  illustration  of  the  fact  that  in  Jesus'  view 
mercy  was  the  quality  on  which  everything  turned, 
and  that  the  temper  in  which  it  is  exercised  is  the 
guarantee  that  a  man's  religious  position  is  the  right 
one.     How  so?     Because  in    exercising  this  virtue 

81 


77i^f 


82  What  is  Christianity  ? 

men  are  imitating  God  :  "Be  merciful,  even  as  your 
Father  in  heaven  is  merciful."  He  who  exercises 
mercy  exercises  God's  prerogative;  for  God's  just- 
ice is  not  accomplished  by  keeping  to  the  rule, 
**an  eye  for  an  eye  and  a  tooth  for  a  tooth,"  but  is 
subject  to  the  power  of  His  mercy. 

Let  us  pause  here  for  a  moment.  The  history  of 
religion  marked  an  enormous  advance,  religion  itself 
was  established  afresh,  when  through  poets  and 
thinkers  in  Greece  on  the  one  hand,  and  through 
the  prophets  in  Palestine  on  the  other,  the  idea  of 
righteousness  and  a  righteous  God  became  a  living 
force  and  transformed  tradition.  The  gods  were 
raised  to  a  higher  level  and  civilised ;  the  warlike 
and  capricious  Jehovah  became  a  holy  Being  in 
whose  court  of  judgment  a  man  might  trust,  albeit 
in  fear  and  trembling.  The  two  great  provinces  of 
religion  and  morality,  hitherto  separated,  were  now 
brought  into  close  relation;  for  "the  Godhead  is 
holy  and  just."  It  is  our  history  that  was  then  de- 
veloped ;  for  without  that  all-important  transforma- 
tion there  would  be  no  such  thing  as  "mankind," 
no  such  thing  as  a  "  history  of  the  world  "  in  the 
higher  sense.  The  most  immediate  result  of  this 
development  may  be  summed  up  in  the  maxim : 
"What  ye  would  not  that  men  should  do  unto 
you,  do  ye  also  not  unto  them."  Insufficient  and 
prosaic  as  the  rule  may  seem,  yet,  if  extended  so 


The  Higher  Righteousness         83 

as  to  cover  all  human  relationships  and  really  ob- 
served, it  contains  a  civilising  force  of  enormous 
strength. 

But  it  does  not  contain  the  ultimate  step.  Not 
until  justice  was  compelled  to  give  way  to  mercy, 
and  the  idea  of  brotherhood  and  self-sacrifice  in 
the  service  of  one's  neighbour  became  paramount — 
another  re-establishment  of  religion — was  the  last 
advance  accomplished  that  it  was  possible  and  ne- 
cessary to  make.  Its  maxim,  "What  ye  would  that 
men  should  do  unto  you,  do  ye  also  unto  them," 
also  seems  prosaic ;  and  yet  rightly  understood  it 
leads  to  the  summit  and  comprises  a  new  method  of 
apprehension,  and  a  new  way  of  judging  one's  own 
life.  The  thought  that  "he  who  loses  his  life  shall 
save  it,"  runs  side  by  side  with  this  maxim  and 
effects  a  transvaluation  of  values,  in  the  certainty 
that  a  man's  true  life  is  not  tied  to  this  span  of  time 
and  is  not  rooted  in  material  existence. 

I  hope  that  I  have  thus  shown,  although  briefly, 
that  in  the  sphere  of  thought  which  is  indicated  by 
"the  higher  righteousness"  and  "the  new  com- 
mandment of  love"  Jesus'  teaching  is  also  con- 
tained in  its  entirety.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
three  spheres  which  we  have  distinguished — the 
kingdom  of  God,  God  as  the  Father  and  the  infinite 
value  of  the  human  soul,  and  the  higher  righteous- 
ness showing  itself  in  love — coalesce ;  for  ultimately 


84  What  is  Christianity  ? 

the  kingdom  is  nothing  but  the  treasure  which  the 
soul  possesses  in  the  eternal  and  merciful  God.  It 
needs  only  a  few  touches  to  develop  this  thought 
into  everything  that,  taking  Jesus'  sayings  as  its 
groundwork,  Christendom  has  known  and  strives  to 
maintain  as  hope,  faith,  and  love. 

To  proceed :  Now  that  we  have  established  the 
fundamental  characteristics  of  Jesus'  message,  let  us 
try,  in  the  second  place,  to  treat  of  the  main  bear- 
ings of  the  Gospel  as  applied  to  individual  problems. 
There  are  six  points  or  questions  which  call  for 
special  attention,  as  being  the  most  important  in 
themselves,  and  consequently  felt  and  regarded  as 
such  in  all  ages.  And  although,  in  the  course  of 
the  Church's  history,  one  or  other  of  these  questions 
may  have  passed  into  the  background  for  a  decade 
or  two,  it  has  always  reappeared  afresh,  and  with 
redoubled  force : — 

(i)  The  Gospel  and  the  world,  or  the  question  of 
asceticism ; 

(2)  The  Gospel  and  the  poor,  or  the  social  ques- 
tion; 

(3)  The  Gospel  and  law,  or  the  question  of  pub- 
lic order; 

(4)  The  Gospel  and  work,  or  the  question  of 
civilisation ; 

(5)  The  Gospel  and  the  Son  of  God,  or  the  Christ- 
ological  question ; 


Asceticism  85 

(6)  The  Gospel  and  doctrine,  or  the  question  of 
creed. 

By  these  six  questions — the  first  four  hang  to- 
gether, and  the  last  two  stand  by  themselves — I 
hope  to  be  able  to  exhibit,  of  course  only  in  outline, 
the  most  important  bearings  of  Jesus'  message. 

(i)   TJie  Gospel  and  the  world,  or  the  question  of 
asceticism. 

There  is  a  widespread  opinion — it  is  dominant  in 
the  Catholic  churches  and  many  Protestants  share 
it  nowadays — that,  in  the  last  resort  and  in  the 
most  important  things  which  it  enjoins,  the  Gospel 
is  a  strictly  world-shunning  and  ascetic  creed.  Some 
people  proclaim  this  piece  of  intelligence  with  sym- 
pathy and  admiration ;  nay,  they  magnify  it  into 
the  contention  that  the  whole  value  and  meaning 
of  genuine  Christianity,  as  of  Buddhism,  lies  in  its 
world-denying  character.  Others  emphasise  the 
world-shunning  doctrines  of  the  Gospel  in  order 
thereby  to  expose  its  incompatibility  with  modern 
ethical  principles,  and  to  prove  its  uselessness  as  a 
religion.  The  Catholic  churches  have  found  a  curi- 
ous way  out  of  the  difficulty  and  one  which  is,  in 
reality,  a  product  of  despair.  They  recognise,  as  I 
have  said,  the  world-denying  character  of  the  Gos- 
pel, and  they  teach,  accordingly,  that  it  is  only  in 
the  form  of  monasticism — that  is,  in  the  **  vita  re- 


86  What  is  Christianity  ? 

ligiosa" — that  true  Christian  life  finds  its  expression. 
But  they  admit  a  "lower"  kind  of  Christianity 
without  asceticism,  as  "sufficient."  We  will  say 
nothing  about  this  strange  concession  now;  the 
Catholic  doctrine  is  that  it  is  only  monks  who  can 
follow  Christ  fully.  With  this  doctrine  a  great  phi- 
losopher, and  a  still  greater  writer,  of  the  nineteenth 
century,  has  made  common  cause.  Schopenhauer 
extols  Christianity  because,  and  in  so  far  as,  it  has 
produced  great  ascetics  like  St.  Anthony  or  St. 
Francis;  but,  beyond  that,  everything  in  the  Christ- 
ian message  seems  to  him  to  be  useless  and  a 
stumbling-block.  With  a  much  deeper  insight  than 
Schopenhauer,  and  with  a  strength  of  feeling  and 
power  of  language  that  carry  us  away,  Tolstoi  has 
emphasised  the  ascetic  and  world-shunning  features 
of  the  Gospel,  and  erected  them  into  a  rule  of  ob- 
servance. That  the  ascetic  ideal  which  he  derives 
from  the  Gospel  is  endowed  with  warmth  and 
strength,  and  includes  the  service  of  one's  neigh- 
bour, is  a  fact  which  we  cannot  deny ;  but  to  him, 
too,  the  shunning  of  the  world  is  the  leading  char- 
acteristic of  Christianity.  There  are  thousands  of 
our  "educated  "  readers  who  find  his  stories  suggest- 
ive and  exciting,  but  who  at  the  bottom  of  their 
hearts  are  pleased  and  relieved  to  know  that  Christ- 
ianity means  the  denial  of  the  world ;  for  then  they 
know   very  well  that    it   does   not   concern   them. 


Asceticism  ^7 

They  are  certain,  and  rightly  certain,  that  this 
world  is  given  them  to  be  made  the  best  of,  within 
the  bounds  of  its  own  blessings  and  its  own  regula- 
tions; and  that  if  Christianity  makes  any  other 
claim,  it  thereby  shows  that  it  is  unnatural.  If 
Christianity  has  no  goal  to  set  before  this  life;  if  it 
transfers  everything  to  a  Beyond ;  if  it  declares  all 
earthly  blessings  to  be  valueless,  and  points  exclu- 
sively to  a  world-shunning  and  contemplative  life, 
it  is  an  offence  to  all  energetic,  nay,  ultimately,  to 
all  true  natures ;  for  such  natures  are  certain  that  our 
faculties  are  given  us  to  be  employed,  and  that  the 
earth  is  assigned  to  us  to  be  cultivated  and  subdued. 
But  is  not  the  Gospel  really  a  world-denying 
creed?  Certain  very  well-known  passages  are  ap- 
pealed to  which  do  not  seem  to  admit  of  any  other 
interpretation:  "If  thy  right  eye  offend  thee,  pluck 
it  out  and  cast  it  from  thee  "  ;  "If  thy  right  hand 
offend  thee,  cut  it  off";  or  the  answer  to  the  rich 
young  man:  "Go  and  sell  that  thou  hast,  and  give 
to  the  poor,  and  thou  shalt  have  treasure  in 
heaven " ;  or  the  saying  about  those  who  have 
made  themselves  eunuchs  for  the  kingdom  of 
heaven's  sake;  or  the  utterance:  "If  any  man  come 
to  me,  and  hate  not  his  father,  and  mother,  and 
wife,  and  children,  and  brethren  and  sisters,  yea, 
and  his  own  life  also,  he  cannot  be  my  disciple." 
These  and  other  passages  seem  to  settle  the  matter, 


88  What  is  Christianity  ? 

and  to  prove  that  the  Gospel  is  altogether  world- 
shunning  and  ascetic  in  its  character.  But  to  this 
thesis  I  oppose  three  considerations  which  point  in 
another  direction.  The  first  is  derived  from  the 
way  in  which  Jesus  came  forward,  and  from  his 
manner  and  course  of  life;  the  second  is  based  upon 
the  impression  which  he  made  upon  his  disciples 
and  was  reflected  in  their  own  lives;  the  third 
springs  from  what  we  said  about  the  fundamental 
features  of  Jesus'  message. 

I.  We  find  in  our  Gospels  a  remarkable  utterance 
by  Jesus,  as  follows:  "John  came  neither  eating 
nor  drinking,  and  they  say.  He  hath  a  devil.  The 
Son  of  Man  came  eating  and  drinking,  and  they 
say.  Behold  a  man  gluttonous  and  a  wine-bibber." 
A  glutton,  then,  and  a  wine-bibber  was  he  called  in 
addition  to  the  other  abusive  names  which  were 
given  him.  From  this  it  clearly  follows  that  in  his 
whole  demeanour  and  manner  of  life  he  made  an 
impression  quite  different  from  that  of  the  preacher 
of  repentance  on  the  banks  of  the  Jordan.  To- 
wards the  various  fields  in  which  asceticism  had 
been  traditionally  practised,  he  must  have  taken  up 
an  attitude  of  indifference.  We  see  him  in  the 
houses  of  the  rich  and  of  the  poor,  at  meals,  with 
women  and  amongst  children;  according  to  tradi- 
tion, even  at  a  wedding.  He  allows  his  feet  to  be 
washed  and  his  head  to  be  anointed.     Further,  he 


Asceticism  89 

is  glad  to  lodge  with  Mary  and  Martha;  he  does 
not  ask  them  to  leave  their  home.  When  he  finds, 
to  his  joy,  people  with  a  firm  faith,  he  leaves  them 
in  the  calling  and  the  position  in  which  they  were. 
We  do  not  hear  of  his  telling  them  to  sell  all  and 
follow  him.  Apparently  he  thinks  it  possible,  nay, 
fitting,  that  they  should  live  unto  their  belief  in  the 
position  in  which  God  has  placed  them.  His  circle 
of  disciples  is  not  exhausted  by  the  few  whom  he 
summoned  directly  to  follow  him.  He  finds  God's 
children  everywhere ;  to  discover  them  in  their  ob- 
scurity and  to  be  allowed  to  speak  to  them  some 
word  of  strength  is  his  highest  pleasure.  But  he 
did  not  organise  his  disciples  into  a  band  of  monks, 
and  he  gave  them  no  directions  as  to  what  they 
were  to  do  and  leave  undone  in  the  life  of  the  day. 
No  one  who  reads  the  Gospels  with  an  unprejudiced 
mind,  and  does  not  pick  his  words,  can  fail  to  ac- 
knowledge that  this  free  and  active  spirit  does  not 
appear  to  be  bent  under  the  yoke  of  asceticism,  and 
that  such  words,  therefore,  as  point  in  this  direction 
must  not  be  taken  in  a  rigid  sense  and  generalised, 
but  must  be  regarded  in  a  wider  connexion  and  from 
a  higher  point  of  view. 

2.  It  is  certain  that  the  disciples  did  not  under- 
stand their  master  to  be  a  world-shunning  ascetic. 
We  shall  see  later  what  sacrifices  they  made  for 
the  Gospel  and  in  what  sense  they  renounced  the 


90  What  is  Christianity  ? 

world.  But  it  is  evident  they  did  not  give  ascetic 
practices  the  chief  place ;  they  maintained  the  rule 
that  the  labourer  is  worthy  of  his  hire ;  they  did  not 
send  away  their  wives.  We  are  incidentally  told  of 
Peter  that  his  wife  accompanied  him  on  his  mis- 
sionary journeys.  Apart  from  what  we  are  told  of 
an  attempt  to  institute  a  kind  of  communism  in  the 
congregation  at  Jerusalem  —  and  we  may  put  it 
aside,  as  it  is  not  trustworthy  and,  moreover,  bore 
no  ascetic  character — we  find  nothing  in  the  apo- 
stolic age  which  suggests  a  community  of  men  who 
were  ascetics  on  principle ;  on  the  contrary,  we  find 
the  conviction  prevailing  everywhere  that  it  is 
within  the  given  circumstances,  in  the  calling  and 
position  in  which  he  finds  himself,  that  a  man  is  to 
be  a  Christian.  How  differently  things  developed 
in  Buddhism  from  the  very  start! 

3.  The  all-important  consideration  is  the  third. 
Let  me  remind  you  of  what  we  said  in  regard  to 
Jesus'  leading  thoughts.  In  the  sphere  indicated 
by  trust  in  God,  humility,  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
and  the  love  of  one's  neighbour,  there  is  no  room 
for  the  introduction  of  any  other  maxim,  least  of 
all  for  one  of  a  legal  character.  At  the  same  time 
Jesus  makes  it  clear  in  what  sense  the  kingdom  of 
God  is  the  antithesis  of  the  world.  The  man  who 
associates  any  ascetic  practice  with  the  words 
"Take   no   thought,"    "Be  merciful   even  as  your 


Asceticism  91 

Father  in  heaven  is  merciful,"  and  so  on,  and  puts 
it  upon  the  same  level  as  those  words,  does  not  un- 
derstand the  sublime  character  of  these  sayings, 
and  has  either  lost  or  has  never  attained  the  feeling 
that  there  is  a  union  with  God  in  which  all  such 
questions  as  shunning  the  world  and  asceticism  are 
left  far  behind. 

For  these  reasons  we  must  decline  to  regard  the 
Gospel  as  a  message  of  world-denial. 

On  the  other  hand,  Jesus  speaks  of  three  enemies, 
and  the  watchword  which  he  gives  in  dealing  with 
them  is  not  that  we  are  to  flee  them ;  rather,  he 
commands  us  to  annihilate  them.  These  three  ene- 
mies are  mammon,  care,  and  selfishness.  Observe 
that  here  there  is  no  question  of  flight  or  denial, 
but  of  a  battle  which  is  to  be  fought  until  the  enemy 
is  annihilated  ;  the  forces  of  darkness  are  to  be  over- 
thrown. By  mammon  he  understands  money  and 
worldly  goods  in  the  widest  sense  of  the  word, 
worldly  goods  which  try  to  gain  the  mastery  over 
us,  and  make  us  tyrants  over  others ;  for  money  is 
"compressed  force."  Jesus  speaks  of  this  enemy 
as  if  it  were  a  person,  as  if  it  were  a  knight  in  ar- 
mour, or  a  king;  nay,  as  if  it  were  the  devil  himself. 
It  is  at  this  enemy  that  the  saying,  "Ye  cannot 
serve  two  masters,"  is  aimed.  Wherever  anything 
belonging  to  the  domain  of  mammon  is  of  such 
value  to  a  man  that  he  sets  his  heart  upon  it,  that 


92  What  is  Christianity  ? 

he  trembles  at  the  thought  of  losing  it,  that  he  is 
no  longer  willing  to  give  it  up,  such  a  man  is  al- 
ready in  bondage.  Hence,  when  the  Christian  feels 
that  this  danger  confronts  him,  he  is  not  to  treat 
with  the  enemy,  but  to  fight,  and  not  fight  only 
but  also  destroy  the  mammon.  Were  Christ  to 
preach  among  us  to-day,  he  would  certainly  not  talk 
in  general  terms,  and  say  to  everyone,  "give  away 
everything  you  have";  but  there  are  thousands 
among  us  to  whom  he  would  so  speak,  and  that 
there  is  scarcely  anyone  who  feels  compelled  to  ap- 
ply these  sayings  of  the  Gospel  to  himself  is  a  fact 
that  ought  to  make  us  suspicious. 

The  second  enemy  is  care.  At  first  sight  it  may 
surprise  us  that  Jesus  should  describe  care  as  so 
terrible  a  foe.  He  ranks  it  with  "heathenism."  It 
is  true  that  in  the  Lord's  Prayer  he  also  taught  men 
to  pray,  "Give  us  this  day  our  daily  bread  ";  but 
a  confident  request  of  this  kind  he  does  not  call 
care.  The  care  which  he  means  is  that  which 
makes  us  timorous  slaves  of  the  day  and  of  material 
things ;  the  care  through  which  bit  by  bit  we  fall  a 
prey  to  the  world.  Care  is  to  him  an  outrage  on 
God,  who  preserves  the  very  sparrows  on  the  house- 
top; it  destroys  the  fundamental  relation  with  the 
Father  in  heaven,  the  childlike  trust,  and  thus  ruins 
our  inmost  soul.  This  is  also  a  point  in  regard  to 
which,  as  in  respect  to  mammon,  we  must  confess 


Asceticism  93 

that  we  do  not  feel  deeply  and  strongly  enough  to 
recognise  the  full  truth  of  Jesus'  message.  But  the 
question  is,  Who  is  right — he  with  the  inexorable 
**Take  no  thought,"  or  we  with  our  debilitating 
fears  ?  We,  too,  in  a  measure  feel  that  a  man  is  not 
really  free,  strong,  and  invincible,  until  he  has  put 
aside  all  his  cares  and  cast  them  upon  God.  How 
much  we  could  accomplish  and  how  strong  we 
should  be,   if  we  did  not  fret. 

And  then,  thirdly :  selfishness.  It  is  self-denial, 
not  asceticism,  which  Jesus  requires;  self-denial  to 
the  point  of  self-renunciation.  "If  thy  right  eye 
offend  thee,  pluck  it  out ;  if  thy  right  hand  offend 
thee,  cut  it  off."  W^herever  some  desire  of  the 
senses  gains  the  upper  hand  of  you,  so  that  you  be- 
come coarse  and  vulgar,  or  in  your  selfishness  a  new 
master  arises  in  you,  you  must  destroy  it;  not  be- 
cause God  has  any  pleasure  in  mutilation,  but 
because  you  cannot  otherwise  preserve  your  better 
part.  It  is  a  hard  demand.  But  it  is  not  met  by 
any  act  of  general  renunciation,  such  as  monks  per- 
form— the  act  may  leave  things  just  as  they  were 
before — but  only  by  a  struggle  and  a  resolute  re- 
nunciation at  the  critical  point. 

With  all  these  enemies,  mammon,  care,  and  self- 
ishness, what  we  have  to  exercise  is  self-denial,  and 
therewith  the  relation  of  Christianity  to  asceticism 
is   determined.     Asceticism    maintains    the   theory 


94  What  is  Christianity  ? 

that  all  worldly  blessings  are  in  themselves  of  no 
value.  This  is  not  the  theory  to  which  we  should 
be  led  if  we  were  to  go  by  the  Gospel;  "for  the 
earth  is  the  Lord's,  and  the  fulness  thereof."  But 
according  to  the  Gospel  a  man  is  to  ask :  Can  and 
ought  I  to  regard  property  and  honour,  friends  and 
relations  as  blessings,  or  must  I  put  them  away?  If 
certain  of  Jesus'  sayings  to  this  effect  have  been 
handed  down  to  us  in  a  general  form  and  were,  no 
doubt,  so  uttered,  still  they  must  be  limited  by  the 
whole  tenor  of  his  discourses.  What  the  Gospel 
asks  of  us  is  solemnly  to  examine  ourselves,  to 
maintain  an  earnest  watch,  and  to  destroy  the 
enemy.  There  can  be  no  doubt,  however,  that 
Jesus  demanded  self-denial  and  self-renunciation  to 
a  much  greater  extent  than  we  like  to  think. 

To  sum  up :  Ascetic  in  the  primary  meaning  of 
the  word  the  Gospel  is  not ;  for  it  is  a  message  of 
trust  in  God,  of  humility,  of  forgiveness  of  sin,  and 
of  mercy.  This  is  a  height  which  nothing  else  can 
approach,  and  into  this  sphere  nothing  else  can  force 
its  way.  Further,  worldly  blessings  are  not  of  the 
devil  but  of  God — ''Your  heavenly  Father  knoweth 
that  ye  have  need  of  all  these  things;  he  arrays  the 
lilies  of  the  field  and  feeds  the  fowls  of  the  air." 
Asceticism  has  no  place  in  the  Gospel  at  all ;  what 
it  asks  is  that  we  should  struggle  against  mammon, 
against  care,  against  selfishness;  what  it  demands 


The  Social  Question  95 

and  disengages  is  love;  the  love  that  serves  and  is 
self-sacrificing.  This  struggle  and  this  love  are  the 
kind  of  asceticism  which  the  Gospel  means,  and 
whoever  encumbers  Jesus'  message  with  any  other 
kind  fails  to  understand  it.  He  fails  to  understand 
its  grandeur  and  its  importance ;  for  there  is  some- 
thing still  more  important  than  '*  giving  one's  body 
to  be  burned  and  bestowing  all  one's  goods  to  feed 
the  poor,"  namely,  self-denial  and  love. 

(2)   The  Gospel  and  tJte  poor y  or  the  social  question. 

The  bearings  of  the  Gospel  in  regard  to  the  social 
question  form  the  second  point  which  we  proposed 
to  consider.  It  is  closely  akin  to  the  first.  Here 
also  we  encounter  different  views  prevalent  at  the 
present  moment,  or,  to  be  more  exact,  two  views, 
which  are  mutually  opposed.  We  are  told,  on  the 
one  hand,  that  the  Gospel  was  in  the  main  a  great 
social  message  to  the  poor,  and  that  everything  else 
in  it  is  of  secondary  importance — mere  contempo- 
rary wrapping,  ancient  tradition,  or  new  forms  sup- 
plied by  the  first  generations  of  Christians.  Jesus, 
they  say,  was  a  great  social  reformer,  who  aimed  at 
relieving  the  lower  classes  from  the  wretched  con- 
dition in  which  they  were  languishing ;  he  set  up  a 
social  programme  which  embraced  the  equality  of 
all  men,  relief  from  economical  distress,  and  deliv- 
erance from  misery  and  oppression.     It  is  only  so. 


96  What  is  Christianity  ? 

they  add,  that  he  can  be  understood,  and  therefore 
so  he  was ;  or  perhaps — so  he  was,  because  it  is  only 
so  that  we  can  understand  him.  For  years  books 
and  pamphlets  have  been  written  dealing  with  the 
Gospel  in  this  sense ;  well-meant  performances 
which  aim  at  thus  providing  Jesus  with  a  defence 
and  a  recommendation.  But  amongst  those  who 
take  the  Gospel  to  be  an  essentially  social  message 
there  are  also  some  who  draw  the  opposite  conclu- 
sion. By  trying  to  prove  that  Jesus'  message  was 
wholly  directed  to  bringing  about  an  economical  re- 
form, they  declare  the  Gospel  to  be  an  entirely 
Utopian  and  useless  programme;  the  view,  they 
say,  which  Jesus  took  of  the  world  was  gentle,  but 
also  weak;  coming  himself  from  the  lower  and  op- 
pressed classes,  he  shared  the  suspicion  entertained 
by  small  people  of  the  great  and  the  rich ;  he  ab- 
horred all  profitable  trade  and  business;  he  failed 
to  understand  the  necessity  of  acquiring  wealth ; 
and  accordingly  he  shaped  his  programme  so  as  to 
disseminate  pauperism  in  the  "world  " — to  him  the 
world  was  Palestine — and  then,  by  way  of  contrast 
with  the  misery  on  earth,  to  build  up  a  kingdom  in 
heaven;  a  programme  unrealisable  in  itself,  and 
offensive  to  men  of  energy.  This,  or  something 
like  this,  is  the  view  held  by  another  section  of 
those  who  identify  the  Gospel  with  a  social  message. 
Opposed  to  this  group  of  persons,  united  in  the 


The  Social  Question  97 

way  in  which  they  look  at  the  Gospel  but  divided  in 
their  opinions  in  regard  to  it,  there  is  another  group 
upon  whom  it  makes  quite  a  different  impression. 
They  assert  that  as  for  any  direct  interest  on  Jesus' 
part  in  the  economical  and  social  conditions  of  his 
age;  nay,  further,  as  for  any  rudimentary  interest 
in  economical  questions  in  general,  it  is  only  read 
into  the  Gospel,  and  that  with  economical  questions 
the  Gospel  has  absolutely  nothing  to  do.  Jesus, 
they  say,  certainly  borrowed  illustrations  and  ex- 
amples from  the  domain  of  economics,  and  took 
a  personal  interest  in  the  poor,  the  sick,  and  the 
miserable,  but  his  purely  religious  teaching  and  his 
saving  activity  were  in  no  way  directed  to  any  im- 
provement in  their  earthly  position  :  to  say  that  his 
objects  and  intentions  were  of  a  social  character  is 
to  secularise  them.  Nay,  there  are  not  a  few  among 
us  who  think  him,  like  themselves,  a  "Conserva- 
tive," who  respected  all  these  existing  social  differ- 
ences and  ordinances  as  "  divinely  ordained." 

The  voices  which  make  themselves  heard  here 
are,  as  you  will  observe,  very  different,  and  the  dif- 
ferent points  of  view  are  defended  with  zeal  and 
pertinacity.  Now,  if  we  are  to  try  to  find  the  po- 
sition which  corresponds  to  the  facts,  there  is,  first 
of  all,  a  brief  remark  to  be  made  on  the  age  in  which 
Jesus  lived.    Our  knowledge  of  the  social  conditions 

in  Palestine  in  his  age  and  for  some  considerable 

7 


98  What  is  Christianity  ? 

time  previously  does  not  go  very  far;  but  there  are 
certain  leading  features  of  it  which  we  can  estab- 
lish, and  two  things  more  particularly  which  we 
can  assert. 

The  governing  classes,  to  which,  above  all,  the 
Pharisees,  and  also  the  priests,  belonged — the  latter 
partly  in  alliance  with  the  temporal  rulers — had  little 
feeling  for  the  needs  of  the  people.  The  condition 
of  those  classes  may  not  have  been  much  worse  than 
it  generally  is  at  all  times  and  in  all  nations,  but  it 
was  bad.  Moreover,  there  was  here  the  additional 
circumstance  that  mercy  and  sympathy  with  the 
poor  had  been  put  into  the  background  by  devotion 
to  public  worship  and  to  the  cult  of  **  righteous- 
ness." Oppression  and  tyranny  on  the  part  of  the 
rich  had  long  become  a  standing  and  inexhaustible 
theme  with  the  Psalmists  and  with  all  men  of  any 
warm  feelings.  Jesus,  too,  could  not  have  spoken 
of  the  rich  as  he  did  speak,  unless  they  had  grossly 
neglected  their  duties. 

In  the  poor  and  oppressed  classes,  in  the  huge 
mass  of  want  and  evil,  amongst  the  multitude  of 
people  for  whom  the  word  "  misery  "  is  often  only 
another  expression  for  the  word  "life,"  nay,  is  life 
itself — in  this  multitude  there  were  groups  of  people 
at  that  time,  as  we  can  surely  see,  who,  with  fervent 
and  steadfast  hope,  were  hanging  upon  the  promises 
and  consoling  words  of  their  God,  waiting  in  hu- 


The  Social  Question  99 

mility  and  patience  for  the  day  when  their  deliver- 
ance was  to  come.  Often  too  poor  to  pay  even  for 
the  barest  advantages  and  privileges  of  public  wor- 
ship, oppressed,  thrust  aside,  and  unjustly  treated, 
they  could  not  raise  their  eyes  to  the  temple;  but 
they  looked  to  the  God  of  Israel,  and  fervent 
prayers  went  up  to  Him  :  *'  Watchman,  what  of  the 
night?"  Thus  their  hearts  were  opened  to  God 
and  ready  to  receive  Him,  and  in  many  of  the 
Psalms,  and  in  the  later  Jewish  literature  which  was 
akin  to  them,  the  word  "poor"  directly  denotes 
those  who  have  their  hearts  open  and  are  waiting 
for  the  consolation  of  Israel.  Jesus  found  this 
usage  of  speech  in  existence  and  adopted  it.  There- 
fore when  we  come  across  the  expression  "  the 
poor  "  in  the  Gospels  we  must  not  think,  without 
further  ceremony,  of  the  poor  in  the  economic  sense. 
As  a  matter  of  fact,  poverty  in  the  economic  sense 
coincided  to  a  large  extent  in  those  days  with  re- 
ligious humility  and  an  openness  of  the  heart  to- 
wards God,  in  contrast  with  the  elevated  "practice 
of  virtue"  of  the  Pharisees  and  its  routine  observ- 
ance in  "righteousness."  But  if  this  were  the  pre- 
vailing condition  of  affairs,  then  it  is  clear  that  our 
modern  categories  of  "  poor"  and  "  rich"  cannot 
be  unreservedly  transferred  to  that  age.  Yet  we 
must  not  forget  that  in  those  days  the  economical 
sense   was   also,  as   a  rule,  included  in    the   word 


loo  What  is  Christianity  ? 

"poor."  We  shall,  therefore,  have  to  examine  in 
our  next  lecture  the  direction  in  which  a  distinction 
can  be  made,  or  perhaps  to  ask,  whether  it  is  possi- 
ble to  fix  the  inner  sense  of  Jesus'  words  in  spite  of 
the  peculiar  difficulty  attaching  to  the  conception 
of  ''poverty."  We  can  have  some  confidence,  how- 
ever, that  we  shall  not  have  to  remain  in  obscurity 
on  this  point;  for  in  its  fundamental  features  the 
Gospel  also  throws  a  bright  light  upon  the  field  cov- 
ered by  this  question. 


LECTURE   VI 

AT  the  close  of  the  last  lecture  I  referred  to  the 
problem  presented  by  "the  poor  "  in  the 
Gospel.  As  a  rule,  the  poor  of  whom  Jesus  was 
thinking  were  also  those  whose  hearts  are  open  to- 
wards God,  and  hence  what  is  said  of  them  cannot 
be  applied  without  further  ceremony  to  the  poor 
generally.  In  considering  the  social  question  we 
must,  therefore,  put  aside  all  those  sayings  of  Jesus 
which  obviously  refer  to  the  poor  in  the  spiritual 
sense.  These  include,  for  instance,  the  first  Beati- 
tude, whether  we  accept  it  in  the  form  in  which  it 
appears  in  Luke  or  in  Matthew.  The  Beatitudes 
associated  with  it  make  it  clear  that  Jesus  was 
thinking  of  the  poor  whose  hearts  were  inwardly 
open  towards  God.  But,  as  we  have  no  time  to  go 
through  all  the  sayings  separately,  we  must  content 
ourselves  with  some  leading  considerations  in  order 
to  establish  the  most  important  points. 

Jesus  regarded  the  possession  of  worldly  goods  as 
a  grave  danger  for  the  soul,  as  hardening  the  heart, 
entangling  us  in  earthly  cares,  and  seducing  us  into 

lOE 


I02  What  is  Christianity  ? 

a  vulgar  life  of  pleasure.     "A  rich  man  shall  hardly 
enter  the  kingdom  of  heaven." 

The  contention  that  Jesus  desired,  so  to  speak,  to 
bring  about  a  general  condition  of  poverty  and  dis- 
tress, in  order  that  he  might  afterwards  make  it  the 
basis  of  his  kingdom  of  heaven — a  contention  which 
we  encounter  in  different  forms — is  erroneous.  The 
very  opposite  is  the  case.  Want  he  called  want, 
and  evil  he  called  evil.  Far  from  showing  them  any 
favour,  he  made  the  greatest  and  strongest  efforts 
to  combat  and  destroy  them.  In  this  sense,  too, 
his  whole  activity  was  a  saving  activity,  that  is  to 
say,  a  struggle  against  evil  and  against  want.  Nay, 
we  might  almost  think  that  he  over-estimated  the 
depressing  load  of  poverty  and  affliction ;  that  he 
occupied  himself  too  much  with  it ;  and  that,  taking 
the  moral  bearings  of  life  as  a  whole,  he  attributed 
too  great  an  importance  to  those  forces  of  sympathy 
and  mercy  which  are  expected  to  counteract  this 
state  of  things.  But  neither,  of  course,  would  this 
view  be  correct.  He  knows  of  a  power  which  he 
thinks  still  worse  than  want  and  misery,  namely, 
sin ;  and  he  knows  of  a  force  still  more  emancipat- 
ing than  mercy,  namely,  forgiveness.  His  discourses 
and  actions  leave  no  doubt  upon  this  point.  It  is 
certain,  therefore,  that  Jesus  never  and  nowhere 
wished  to  keep  up  poverty  and  misery,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  he  combated  them  himself  and  bid  others 


The  Social  Question  103 

combat  them.  The  Christians  who  in  the  course  of 
the  Church's  history  were  for  countenancing  mendi- 
cancy and  recommending  universal  pauperisation,  or 
sentimentally  coquetted  with  misery  and  distress, 
cannot  with  any  show  of  reason  appeal  to  him. 
Upon  those,  however,  who  were  anxious  to  devote 
their  whole  lives  to  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  and 
the  ministry  of  the  Word — he  did  not  ask  this  of 
everyone,  but  regarded  it  as  a  special  calling  from 
God  and  a  special  gift — upon  them  he  enjoined  the 
renunciation  of  all  that  they  had,  that  is  to  say,  all 
worldly  goods.  Yet  that  does  not  mean  that  he 
relegated  them  to  a  life  of  beggary.  On  the  con- 
trary, they  were  to  be  certain  that  they  would  find 
their  bread  and  their  means  of  livelihood.  What  he 
meant  by  that  we  learn  from  a  saying  of  his  which 
was  accidentally  omitted  from  the  Gospels,  but  has 
been  handed  down  to  us  by  the  apostle  Paul.  In 
the  ninth  chapter  of  his  first  epistle  to  the  Corinth- 
ians he  writes:  "The  Lord  hath  ordained  that 
they  which  preach  the  gospel  should  live  of  the 
gospel."  An  absence  of  worldly  possessions  he  re- 
quired of  the  ministers  of  the  Word,  that  is,  of  the 
missionaries,  in  order  that  they  might  live  entirely 
for  their  calling.  But  he  did  not  mean  that  they 
were  to  beg.  This  is  a  Franciscan  misconception 
which  is  perhaps  suggested  by  Jesus'  words  but 
carries  us  away  from  his  meaning. 


I04  What  is  Christianity  ? 

In  this  connexion  allow  me  to  digress  for  a  mo- 
ment from  our  subject.  Those  members  of  the 
Christian  churches  who  have  become  professional 
evangehsts  or  ministers  of  the  Word  in  their  par- 
ishes have  not,  as  a  rule,  found  it  necessary  to  fol- 
low the  Lord's  injunction  to  dispossess  themselves 
of  their  worldly  goods.  So  far  as  priests  or  pas- 
tors, as  the  case  may  be,  and  not  missionaries,  are 
concerned,  it  may  be  said  with  some  justice  that  the 
injunction  does  not  refer  to  them;  for  it  presup- 
poses that  a  man  has  undertaken  the  office  oi  propa- 
gating the  Gospel.  It  may  be  said,  further,  that  the 
Lord's  injunctions,  over  and  above  those  relating  to 
the  commandment  of  love,  must  not  be  made  into 
inviolable  laws,  as  otherwise  Christian  liberty  will  be 
impaired,  and  the  high  privilege  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion to  adapt  its  shape  to  the  course  of  history, 
free  from  all  constraint,  will  be  prejudiced.  But 
still  it  may  be  asked  whether  it  would  not  have 
been  an  extraordinary  gain  to  Christianity  if  those 
who  are  called  to  be  its  ministers, — the  missionaries 
and  pastors,  had  followed  the  Lord's  rules.  At  the 
very  least,  it  ought  to  be  a  strict  principle  with  them 
to  concern  themselves  with  property  and  worldly 
goods  only  so  far  as  will  prevent  them  being  a  bur- 
den to  others,  and  beyond  that  to  renounce  them. 
I  entertain  no  doubt  that  the  time  will  come  when 
the  world  will  tolerate  a  life  of  luxury  among  those 


The  Social  Question  105 

who  are  charged  with  the  cure  of  souls  as  little  as  it 
tolerates  priestly  government.  Our  feelings  in  this 
respect  are  becoming  finer,  and  that  is  an  advan- 
tage. It  will  no  longer  be  thought  fitting,  in  the 
higher  sense  of  the  word,  for  anyone  to  preach  re- 
signation and  contentment  to  the  poor,  who  is  well 
off  himself,  and  zealously  concerned  for  the  increase 
of  his  property.  A  healthy  man  may  well  offer  con- 
solation to  the  sick ;  but  how  shall  a  man  of  pro- 
perty convince  those  who  have  none  that  worldly 
goods  are  of  no  value  ?  The  Lord's  injunction  that 
the  minister  of  the  Word  is  to  divest  himself  of 
worldly  possessions  will  still  come  to  be  honoured 
in  the  history  of  his  communion. 

Jesus  laid  down  no  social  programme  for  the  sup- 
pression of  poverty  and  distress,  if  by  programme 
we  mean  a  set  of  definitely  prescribed  regulations. 
With  economical  conditions  and  contemporary  cir- 
cumstances he  did  not  interfere.  Had  he  become 
entangled  in  them ;  had  he  given  laws  which  were 
ever  so  salutary  for  Palestine,  what  would  have  been 
gained  by  it?  They  would  have  served  the  needs 
of  a  day,  and  to-morrow  would  have  been  antiqua- 
ted ;  to  the  Gospel  they  would  have  been  a  burden 
and  a  source  of  confusion.  We  must  be  careful  not 
to  exceed  the  limits  set  to  such  injunctions  as 
**Give  to  him  that  asketh  thee"  and  others  of  a 
similar  kind.  They  must  be  understood  in  connexion 


io6  What  is  Christianity  ? 

with  the  time  and  the  situation.  They  refer 
to  the  immediate  wants  of  the  applicant,  which 
were  satisfied  with  a  piece  of  bread,  a  drink  of 
water,  an  article  of  clothing  to  cover  his  nakedness. 
We  must  remember  that  in  the  Gospel  we  are  in  the 
East,  and  in  circumstances  which  from  an  economi- 
cal point  of  view  are  somewhat  undeveloped.  Jesus 
was  no  social  reformer.  He  could  say  on  occasion, 
"The  poor  ye  have  always  with  you,"  and  thereby, 
it  seems,  indicate  that  the  conditions  would  undergo 
no  essential  change.  He  refused  to  be  a  judge  be- 
tween contending  heirs,  and  a  thousand  problems  of 
economics  and  social  life  he  would  have  just  as  re- 
solutely put  aside  as  the  unreasonable  demand  that 
he  would  settle  a  question  of  inheritance.  Yet 
again  and  again  people  have  ventured  to  deduce 
some  concrete  social  programme  from  the  Gospel. 
Even  evangelical  theologians  have  made  the  at- 
tempt, and  are  still  making  it — an  endeavour  hope- 
less in  itself  and  full  of  danger,  but  absolutely 
bewildering  and  intolerable  when  the  people  try  to 
"fill  up  the  gaps" — and  they  are  many — to  be 
found  in  the  Gospel  with  regulations  and  pro- 
grammes drawn  from  the  Old  Testament. 

No  religion,  not  even  Buddhism,  ever  went  to 
work  with  such  an  energetic  social  message,  and  so 
strongly  identified  itself  with  that  message  as  we 
see  to  be  the  case  in  the  Gospel.     How  so  ?     Be- 


The  Social  Question  107 

cause  the  words  "Love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself  " 
were  spoken  in  deep  earnest ;  because  with  these 
words  Jesus  turned  a  h'ght  upon  all  the  concrete 
relations  of  life,  upon  the  world  of  hunger,  poverty 
and  misery;  because,  lastly,  he  uttered  them  as  a 
religious,  nay,  as  the  religious  maxim.  Let  me  re- 
mind you  once  more  of  the  parable  of  the  Last 
Judgment,  where  the  whole  question  of  a  man's 
worth  and  destiny  is  made  dependent  on  whether 
he  has  practised  the  love  of  his  neighbour;  let  me 
remind  you  of  the  other  parable  of  the  rich  man 
and  poor  Lazarus.  I  should  like  to  cite  another 
story,  too,  which  is  little  known,  because  it  occurs 
in  this  wording  not  in  our  four  Gospels  but  in  the 
Gospel  of  the  Hebrews.  The  story  of  the  rich 
young  man  is  there  handed  down  as  follows: — 

A  rich  man  said  to  the  Lord  :  Master,  what  good 
must  I  do  that  I  may  have  life  ?  He  answered  him  : 
Man,  keep  the  law  and  the  prophets.  The  other 
answered  :  That  have  I  done.  He  said  to  him:  Go,  sell 
all  thy  possessions  and  distribute  them  to  the  poor,  and 
come  and  follow  me.  Then  the  rich  man  began  to 
scratch  his  head,  and  the  speech  did  not  please  him. 
And  the  Lord  said  to  him  :  How  canst  thou  say:  I  have 
kept  the  law  and  the  prophets,  as  it  is  written  in  the 
law.  Love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself  ?  Behold,  many  of 
thy  brethren,  sons  of  Abraham,  lie  in  dirty  rags  and  die 
of  hunger,  and  thy  house  is  full  of  many  goods,  and 
nothinsr  comes  out  of  it  to  them. 


io8  What  is  Christianity  ? 

You  observe  how  Jesus  felt  the  material  wants  of 
the  poor,  and  how  he  deduced  a  remedy  for  such 
distress  from  the  commandment:  "Love  thy  neigh- 
bour as  thyself."  People  ought  not  to  speak  of  lov- 
ing their  neighbours  if  they  can  allow  men  beside 
them  to  starve  and  die  in  misery.  It  is  not  only 
that  the  Gospel  preaches  solidarity  and  the  helping 
of  others;  it  is  in  this  message  that  its  real  import 
consists.  In  this  sense  it  is  profoundly  socialistic, 
just  as  it  is  also  profoundly  individualistic,  because 
it  establishes  the  infinite  and  independent  value  of 
every  human  soul.  Its  tendency  to  union  and 
brotherliness  is  not  so  much  an  accidental  phenom- 
enon in  its  history  as  the  essential  feature  of  its 
character.  The  Gospel  aims  at  founding  a  com- 
munity among  men  as  wide  as  human  life  itself  and 
as  deep  as  human  need.  As  has  been  truly  said,  its 
object  is  to  transform  the  socialism  which  rests  on 
the  basis  of  conflicting  interests  into  the  socialism 
which  rests  on  the  consciousness  of  a  spiritual  unity. 
In  this  sense  its  social  message  can  never  be  outbid. 
In  the  course  of  the  ages  people's  opinions  as  to 
what  constitutes  "an  existence  worthy  of  a  man  " 
have,  thank  God,  become  much  changed  and  im- 
proved. But  Jesus,  too,  knew  of  this  way  of 
measuring  things.  Did  he  not  once  refer,  almost 
bitterly,  to  his  own  position:  "The  foxes  have 
holes,  and  the  birds  of  the  air  have  nests :  but  the 


The  Social  Question  109 

Son  of  Man  hath  not  where  to  lay  his  head  "  ?  A 
dwelling,  sufficient  daily  bread,  cleanliness  —  all 
these  needs  he  touched  upon,  and  their  satisfaction 
he  held  to  be  necessary,  and  a  condition  of  earthly 
life.  If  a  man  cannot  procure  them  for  himself, 
others  are  to  step  in  and  do  it  for  him.  There  can 
be  no  doubt,  therefore,  that  if  Jesus  were  with  us 
to-day  he  would  side  with  those  who  are  making 
great  efforts  to  relieve  the  hard  lot  of  the  poor  and 
procure  them  better  conditions  of  life.  The  falla- 
cious principle  of  the  free  play  of  forces,  of  the 
"live  and  let  live"  principle — a  better  name  for  it 
would  be  the  "live  and  let  die" — is  entirely  op- 
posed to  the  Gospel.  And  it  is  not  as  our  servants, 
but  as  our  brothers,  that  we  are  to  help  the  poor. 

Lastly,  our  riches  do  not  belong  to  us  alone.  The 
Gospel  has  prescribed  no  regulations  as  to  how  we 
are  to  use  them,  but  it  leaves  us  in  no  doubt  that 
we  are  to  regard  ourselves  not  as  owners  but  as  ad- 
ministrators in  the  service  of  our  neighbour.  Nay, 
it  almost  looks  as  if  Jesus  contemplated  the  possi- 
bility of  a  union  among  men  in  which  wealth,  as 
private  property  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  word,  was 
non-existent.  Here,  however,  we  touch  upon  a 
question  which  is  not  easy  to  decide,  and  which, 
perhaps,  ought  not  to  be  raised  at  all,  because 
Jesus'  eschatological  ideas  and  his  particular  hori- 
zon enter  into  it.    Nor  is  it  a  question  that  we  need 


I  lo  What  is  Christianity  ? 

raise.  It  is  the  disposition  which  Jesus  kindled  in 
his  disciples  towards  poverty  and  want  that  is  all- 
important. 

The  Gospel  is  a  social  message,  solemn  and  over- 
powering in  its  force ;  it  is  the  proclamation  of  sol- 
idarity and  brotherliness,  in  favour  of  the  poor. 
But  the  message  is  bound  up  with  the  recognition 
of  the  infinite  value  of  the  human  soul,  and  is  con- 
tained in  what  Jesus  said  about  the  kingdom  of 
God.  We  may  also  assert  that  it  is  an  essential 
part  of  what  he  there  said.  But  laws  or  ordi- 
nances or  injunctions  bidding  us  forcibly  alter  the 
conditions  of  the  age  in  which  we  may  happen  to  be 
living  are  not  to  be  found  in  the  Gospel. 

(3)    The  Gospel  and  the  law,  or  the  question  of 
public  order. 

The  problem  dealing  with  the  relation  of  the  Gos- 
pel to  law  embraces  two  leading  questions:  (i)  the 
relation  of  the  Gospel  to  constituted  authority;  (2) 
the  relation  of  the  Gospel  to  legal  ordinances  gener- 
ally, in  so  far  as  they  possess  a  wider  range  than  is 
covered  by  the  conception  "constituted  authority." 
It  is  not  easy  to  mistake  the  answer  to  the  first 
question,  but  the  second  is  more  complicated  and 
beset  with  greater  difficulties;  and  very  diverse 
opinions  are  entertained  in  regard  to  it. 

As  to  Jesus*  relation  to  the  constituted  authori- 


The  Gospel  and  Law  m 

ties  of  his  day,  I  need  scarcely  remind  you  again  in 
express  terms  that  he  was  no  political  revolutionary, 
and  that  he  laid  down  no  political  programme.  Al- 
though he  is  sure  that  his  Father  would  send  him 
twelve  legions  of  angels  were  he  to  ask  Him,  he  did 
not  ask  Him.  When  they  wanted  to  make  him  a 
king,  he  disappeared.  Ultimately,  indeed,  when  he 
thought  well  to  reveal  himself  to  the  whole  nation 
as  the  Messiah — how  he  came  to  the  decision  and 
carried  it  out  are  points  in  which  we  are  left  in  the 
dark — he  made  his  entry  into  Jerusalem  as  a  king; 
but  of  the  modes  of  presenting  himself  which 
prophecy  suggested,  he  chose  that  which  was  most 
remote  from  a  political  manifestation.  The  way  in 
which  he  understood  his  Messianic  duty  is  shown 
by  his  driving  the  buyers  and  sellers  from  the  tem- 
ple. In  this  cleansing  of  the  temple  it  was  not  the 
constituted  authorities  whom  he  attacked,  but  those 
who  had  assumed  to  themselves  rights  of  authority 
over  the  soul.  In  every  nation,  side  by  side  with 
the  constituted  authorities,  an  unconstituted  au- 
thority is  established,  or  rather  two  unconstituted 
authorities.  They  are  the  political  church  and  the 
political  parties.  What  the  political  church  wants, 
in  the  widest  sense  of  the  word  and  under  very  vari- 
ous guises,  is  to  rule;  to  get  hold  of  men's  souls 
and  bodies,  consciences  and  worldly  goods.  What 
political  parties  want  is  the  same;  and  when  the 


112  What  is  Christianity? 

heads  of  these  parties  set  themselves  up  as  popular 
leaders,  a  terrorism  is  developed  which  is  often 
worse  than  the  fear  of  royal  despots.  It  was  not 
otherwise  in  Palestine  in  Jesus'  day.  The  priests 
and  the  Pharisees  held  the  nation  in  bondage  and 
murdered  its  soul.  For  this  unconstituted  "  au- 
thority "  Jesus  showed  a  really  emancipating  and 
refreshing  disrespect.  He  was  never  tired  of  at- 
tacking it — nay,  in  his  struggle  with  it  he  roused 
himself  to  a  state  of  holy  indignation — of  exposing 
its  wolfish  nature  and  hypocrisy,  and  of  declaring 
that  its  day  of  judgment  was  at  hand.  In  whatever 
domain  it  had  any  warrant  to  act,  he  accepted  it  : 
"  Go  and  show  yourselves  unto  the  priests."  So 
far  as  they  really  proclaimed  God's  law  he  recog- 
nised them:  "  Whatever  they  tell  you  to  do,  that 
do."  But  these  were  the  people  to  whom  he  read 
the  terrible  lecture  given  in  Matthew  xxiii.  :  **  Woe 
unto  you,  scribes  and  Pharisees,  hypocrites!  for  ye 
are  like  unto  whited  sepulchres,  which  indeed  ap- 
pear beautiful  outward,  but  are  within  full  of  dead 
men's  bones  and  of  all  uncleanness."  Towards 
these  spiritual  "  authorities,"  then,  he  filled  his  dis- 
ciples with  a  holy  want  of  respect,  and  even  of 
"  King"  Herod  he  spoke  with  bitter  irony:  '*  Go 
ye  and  tell  that  fox."  On  the  other  hand,  so  far  as 
we  can  judge  from  the  scanty  evidence  before  us, 
his  attitude  towards  the  real  authorities,  those  who 


The  Gospel  and  Law  113 

wielded  the  sword,  was  different.  He  recognised 
that  they  had  an  actual  right  to  be  obeyed,  and  he 
never  withdrew  his  own  person  from  their  jurisdic- 
tion. Nor  are  we  to  understand  the  commandment 
against  swearing  as  including  an  oath  taken  before 
a  magistrate.  No  one  with  a  grain  of  salt,  as  Well- 
hausen  has  rightly  said,  can  miss  the  inner  meaning 
of  this  commandment.  On  the  other  hand,  we 
must  be  careful  not  to  rate  Jesus'  position  in  regard 
to  constituted  authority  too  high.  People  usually 
appeal  to  the  often  quoted  saying:  "  Render  unto 
Caesar  the  things  which  are  Caesar's  and  unto  God 
the  things  that  are  God's."  But  this  saying  is  often 
misunderstood.  Wherever  it  is  explained  as  mean- 
ing that  Jesus  recognised  God  and  C^sar  as  the  two 
powers  which  in  some  way  or  other  exist  side  by 
side,  or  are  even  in  secret  alliance,  it  is  taken  in  a 
wrong  sense.  Jesus  had  no  such  thought;  on  the 
contrary,  he  spoke  of  the  two  powers  as  separate  and 
divorced  from  each  other.  God  and  Caesar  are  the 
lords  of  two  quite  different  provinces.  Jesus  settled 
the  question  that  was  in  dispute  by  pointing  out 
this  difference,  which  is  so  great  that  no  conflict  be- 
tween the  powers  can  arise.  The  penny  is  an 
earthly  coin  and  bears  Caesar's  image;  let  it  be 
given,  then,  to  Caesar,  but — this  we  may  take  as  the 
complement — the  soul  and  all  its  powers  have  no- 
thing to  do  with  Czesar;  they  belong  to  God.      In 


114  What  is  Christianity? 

a  word,  the  all-important  matter,  in  Jesus'  view,  is 
not  to  mix  up  the  two  provinces.  When  we  are 
once  quite  clear  about  this,  then  we  may  go  on  to 
remark  on  the  significance  of  the  fact  that  Jesus  en- 
joined compliance  with  the  demand  for  payment  of 
the  imperial  taxes.  No  doubt  it  is  important  to 
note  that  he  himself  respected  the  constituted  au- 
thorities, and  wished  to  see  them  respected ;  but 
in  regard  to  the  estimate  which  he  formed  of 
them,  what  he  said  is,  at  the  least,  of  a  neutral 
character. 

On  the  other  hand,  we  possess  another  saying  of 
Jesus  in  regard  to  constituted  authority  which  is 
much  less  often  quoted,  and  nevertheless  affords  us 
a  deeper  insight  into  the  Lord's  thoughts  than  the 
one  which  we  have  just  discussed.  Let  us  consider 
it  for  a  moment.  The  fact  that  it  forms  a  point  of 
transition  to  the  consideration  of  the  attitude  which 
Jesus  took  up  in  regard  to  legal  regulations  in  gen- 
eral also  makes  it  worth  our  attention.  In  Mark  x. 
42,  we  read: 

Jesus  called  them  (/*.  e.,  his  disciples)  to  him  and 
saith  unto  them,  Ye  know  that  they  which  are  accounted 
to  rule  over  the  Gentiles  exercise  lordship  over  them  : 
and  their  great  ones  exercise  authority  upon  them.  But 
so  shall  it  not  be  among  you  :  but  whosoever  shall  be 
great  among  you  shall  be  your  minister  :  and  whosoever 
of  you  will  be  the  chiefest  shall  be  servant  of  all. 


The  Gospel  and  Law  115 

Observe  here,  first  of  all,  the  "  transvaluation  of 
values."  Jesus  simply  reverses  the  usual  process: 
to  be  great  and  to  occupy  the  foremost  position 
means,  in  his  view,  to  serve ;  his  disciples  are  to  aim, 
not  at  ruling,  but  at  each  being  all  other  men's  serv- 
ant. Next  observe  the  opinion  which  he  has  of 
authority  as  it  was  then  constituted.  Their  func- 
tions are  based  on  forces  and  this  is  the  very  reason 
which,  in  Jesus'  view,  puts  them  outside  the  moral 
sphere ;  nay,  there  is  a  fundamental  opposition  be- 
tween it  and  them:  "  Thus  do  the  earthly  rulers.'* 
Jesus  tells  his  disciples  to  act  differently.  Law  and 
legal  ordinance,  as  resting  on  force  only,  on  actual 
power  and  its  exercise,  have  no  moral  value.  Nev- 
ertheless Jesus  did  not  command  men  not  to  sub- 
ject themselves  to  these  authorities ;  they  were  to 
rate  them  according  to  their  value,  that  is,  accord- 
ing to  their  non-value,  and  they  were  to  arrange 
their  own  lives  on  other  principles,  namely,  on  the 
opposite ;  they  were  not  to  use  force,  but  to  serve. 
Here  we  have  already  passed  to  the  general  ground 
of  legal  ordinance,  for  it  seems  to  be  an  essential 
feature  of  all  law  to  secure  observance  by  force 
when  called  in  question. 

When  we  approach  the  second  point,  the  relation 
of  the  Gospel  to  legal  ordinance  generally,  we  again 
encounter  two  different  views.  One  of  them — in 
modern  times  more  particularly  maintained,  in  his 


ii6  What  is  Christianity? 

treatise  on  Canon  Law,  by  Professor  Sohm  of  Leip- 
zig, who  presents  points  of  contact  with  Tolstoi — 
lays  down  that  in  their  respective  natures  law  and 
the  world  of  spiritual  things  are  diametrically  op- 
posed ;  and  that  it  is  in  contradiction  with  the  char- 
acter of  the  Gospel  and  the  community  founded 
thereon  that  the  Church  has  developed  any  legal 
ordinances  at  all.  In  his  survey  of  the  earliest  de- 
velopment of  the  Church  Professor  Sohm  has  gone 
so  far  as  to  see  in  the  moment  when  Christendom 
gave  a  place  in  its  midst  to  legal  ordinances  a  sec- 
ond Fall.  Nevertheless  he  is  unwilling  to  impugn 
the  law  in  its  own  province.  But  Tolstoi  refuses, 
in  the  name  of  the  Gospel,  to  allow  the  law  any 
rights  at  all.  He  maintains  that  the  leading  prin- 
ciple of  the  Gospel  is  that  a  man  is  never  to  insist 
upon  his  rights,  and  that  not  even  constituted  au- 
thority is  to  offer  any  external  resistance  to  evil. 
Authority  and  law  are  simply  to  cease.  Opposed 
to  Tolstoi  there  are  others  who  more  or  less  posi- 
tively contend  that  the  Gospel  takes  law  and  legal 
relations  under  its  protection;  that  it  sanctifies 
them  and  thereby  raises  them  into  a  divine  sphere. 
These  are,  briefly,  the  two  leading  points  of  view 
which  are  here  in  conflict. 

As  regards  the  latter,  there  is  little  that  need  be 
said.  It  is  a  mockery  of  the  Gospel  to  say  that  it 
protects   and    sanctifies   everything    that    presents 


The  Gospel  and  Law  1 1 7 

itself  as  law  and  legal  relation  at  a  given  moment. 
Leaving  a  thing  alone  and  bearing  with  it  are  not  the 
same  as  sanctioning  and  preserving  it.  Nay,  it  is  a 
serious  question  whether  even  bearing  with  it  is  not 
too  much  to  say,  and  whether  Tolstoi  is  not  right. 
The  difficulty  of  the  matter  makes  it  necessary  that 
I  should  take  you  back  a  little  way  in  Jewish 
history. 

For  hundreds  of  years  the  poor  and  oppressed  in 
the  people  of  Israel  had  been  crying  out  for  justice. 
It  was  a  cry  which  still  affects  us  to-day  as  we  hear 
it  in  the  words  of  the  prophets  and  out  of  the 
prayers  of  the  Psalmists;  but  time  after  time  it 
passed  unheeded.  None  of  the  legal  regulations  in 
force  was  free  from  the  power  of  tyrannical  authori- 
ties, to  be  distorted  and  exploited  by  them  just  as 
they  saw  fit.  In  speaking  of  legal  regulations  and 
their  exercise,  and  in  examining  Jesus'  attitude  to- 
wards them,  we  must  not  straightway  think  of  our 
own  legal  relations,  which  have  grown  up  partly  on 
the  basis  of  Christianity.  Jesus  was  of  a  nation 
the  greater  part  of  which  had  for  generations  been 
in  vain  asking  for  their  rights,  and  which  was  fa- 
miliar with  law  only  in  the  form  of  force.  The 
necessary  consequence  was  that  in  such  a  nation  a 
feeling  of  despair  arose  in  regard  to  the  law;  de- 
spair, as  much  of  the  possibility  of  ever  getting  just- 
ice on  earth  as,  conversely,  of  the  moral  claim  of 


1 18  What  is  Christianity  ? 

law  to  have  any  validity  at  all.  We  can  see  some- 
thing of  this  temper  even  in  the  Gospel.  But  there 
is  a  second  consideration  which  is  a  standing  correct- 
ive to  this  temper.  Jesus,  like  all  truly  religious 
minds,  was  firmly  convinced  that  in  the  end  God 
will  do  justice.  If  He  does  not  do  it  here,  He  will 
do  it  in  the  Beyond,  and  that  is  the  main  point.  In 
this  connexion  there  was,  in  Jesus'  view,  nothing 
objectionable  in  the  idea  of  law  in  the  sense  of  a 
just  recompense ;  it  was  a  lofty,  nay,  a  dominating 
idea.  Just  recompense  is  the  function  of  God's 
majesty ;  to  what  extent  it  is  modified  by  His  mercy 
is  a  question  which  we  need  not  here  consider.  The 
contention  that  Jesus  took  a  depreciatory  view  of  law 
as  such,  and  of  the  exercise  of  law,  cannot  be  sus- 
tained for  a  moment.  On  the  contrary,  everyone  is 
to  get  his  rights;  nay  more,  his  disciples  are  one 
day  to  share  in  administering  God's  justice  and 
themselves  judge.  It  was  only  the  justice  which 
was  exercised  with  violence  and  therefore  unjustly, 
the  justice  which  lay  upon  the  nation  like  a  tyran- 
nical and  bloody  decree,  that  he  set  aside.  He  be- 
lieved in  true  justice,  and  he  was  certain,  too,  that 
it  would  prevail ;  so  certain,  that  he  did  not  think 
it  necessary  for  justice  to  use  force  in  order  to  re- 
main justice. 

This  brings  us  to  the  last  point.     We  possess  a 
number  of   Jesus*  sayings  in  which  he  directs  his 


The  Gospel  and  Law  119 

disciples  to  renounce  all  their  lawful  demands,  and 
so  forego  their  just  rights.  You  all  know  those 
sayings.  Let  me  remind  you  of  one  only:  "  But  I 
say  unto  you.  That  ye  resist  not  evil,  but  whosoever 
shall  smite  thee  on  thy  right  cheek,  turn  to  him  the 
other  also.  And  if  any  man  will  sue  thee  at  the 
law,  and  take  away  thy  coat,  let  him  have  thy  cloak 
also."  The  demand  here  made  seems  to  proscribe 
law  and  disorganise  all  the  legal  relations  of  life. 
Again  and  again  these  words  have  been  appealed  to 
with  the  object  of  showing  either  that  Christianity 
is  incompatible  with  life  as  it  actually  is,  or  that 
Christendom  has  fallen  away  from  the  principles  of 
its  Master.  By  way  of  reply  to  this  argument  the 
following  observations  may  be  made: — (i.)  Jesus 
was,  as  we  have  seen,  steeped  in  the  conviction 
that  God  does  justice ;  in  the  end,  therefore,  the  op- 
pressor will  not  prevail,  but  the  oppressed  will  get 
his  rights,  (ii.)  Earthly  rights  are  in  themselves 
of  little  account,  and  it  does  not  much  matter  if  we 
lose  them,  (iii.)  The  world  is  in  such  an  unhappy 
state,  injustice  has  got  so  much  the  upper  hand  in 
it,  that  the  victim  of  oppression  is  incapable  of  mak- 
ing good  his  rights  even  if  he  tries,  (iv.)  As  God 
— and  this  is  the  main  point — mingles  His  justice 
with  mercy,  and  lets  His  sun  shine  on  the  just  and 
on  the  unjust,  so  Jesus'  disciple  is  to  show  love  to 
his  enemies  and  disarm  them  by  gentleness.     Such 


I20  What  is  Christianity? 

are  the  thoughts  which  underlie  those  lofty  sayings 
and  at  the  same  time  set  them  their  due  limits. 
And  is  the  demand  which  they  contain  really  so 
supramundane,  so  impossible  ?  Do  we  not  in  the 
circle  of  our  family  and  friends  advise  those  who 
belong  to  us  to  act  in  the  same  way,  and  not  to  re- 
turn evil  for  evil  and  abuse  for  abuse  ?  What 
family,  what  society,  could  continue  to  exist,  if 
every  member  of  it  were  anxious  only  to  pursue  his 
own  rights,  and  did  not  learn  to  renounce  them 
even  when  attacked?  Jesus  regards  his  disciples  as 
a  circle  of  friends,  and  he  looks  out  beyond  this 
circle  to  a  league  of  brothers  which  will  take  shape 
in  the  future  and  extend.  But,  we  are  asked,  are 
we  in  all  cases  to  renounce  the  pursuit  of  our  rights 
in  the  face  of  our  enemies  ?  are  we  to  use  no  weap- 
ons but  those  of  gentleness  ?  To  speak  with  Tol- 
stoi, are  the  magistrates  not  to  inflict  punishment, 
and  thereby  to  be  effaced  ?  are  nations  not  to  fight 
for  house  and  home  when  they  are  wantonly  at- 
tacked ?  I  venture  to  maintain  that,  when  Jesus 
spoke  the  words  which  I  have  quoted,  he  was  not 
thinking  of  such  cases,  and  that  to  interpret  them 
in  this  direction  involves  a  clumsy  and  dangerous 
misconception  of  their  meaning.  Jesus  never  had 
anyone  but  the  individual  in  mind,  and  the  abiding 
disposition  of  the  heart  in  love.  To  say  that  this 
disposition  cannot  coexist  with  the  pursuit  of  one's 


The  Gospel  and  Law  121 

own  rights,  with  the  conscientious  administration 
of  justice,  and  with  the  stern  punishment  of  crime, 
is  a  piece  of  prejudice,  in  support  of  which  we  may 
appeal  in  vain  to  the  letter  of  those  sayings,  which 
did  not  aim  at  being  laws  or,  therefore,  at  prescrib- 
ing regulations.  This  much,  however,  must  be 
added,  in  order  that  the  loftiness  of  the  demand 
which  the  Gospel  makes  may  be  in  no  way  abated : 
Jesus*  disciple  ought  to  be  able  to  renounce  the 
pursuit  of  his  rights,  and  ought  to  co-operate  in 
forming  a  nation  of  brothers,  in  which  justice  is 
done,  no  longer  by  the  aid  of  force,  but  by  free 
obedience  to  the  good,  and  which  is  united  not  by 
legal  regulations  but  by  the  ministry  of  love. 


LECTURE   VII 

WE  were  occupied  in  the  last  lecture  with  the 
relation  of  the  Gospel  to  law  and  legal  ordi- 
nance. We  saw  that  Jesus  was  convinced  that  God 
does,  and  will  do,  justice.  We  saw,  further,  that 
he  demanded  of  his  disciples  that  they  should  be 
able  to  renounce  their  rights.  In  giving  expression 
to  this  demand,  far  from  having  all  the  circum- 
stances of  his  own  time  in  mind,  still  less  the  more 
complex  conditions  of  a  later  age,  he  has  one  and 
one  only  present  to  his  soul,  namely,  the  relation  of 
every  man  to  the  kingdom  of  God.  Because  a  man 
is  to  sell  all  that  he  has  in  order  to  buy  the  pearl  of 
great  price,  so  he  must  also  be  able  to  abandon  his 
earthly  rights  and  subordinate  everything  to  that 
highest  relation.  But  in  connexion  with  this  mes- 
sage of  his,  Jesus  opens  up  to  us  the  prospect  of  a 
union  among  men,  which  is  held  together  not  by 
any  legal  ordinance,  but  by  the  rule  of  love,  and 
where  a  man  conquers  his  enemy  by  gentleness.  It 
is  a  high  and  glorious  ideal,  and  we  have  received 
it  from  the  very  foundation  of  our  religion.  It 
ought  to  float  before  our  eyes  as  the  goal  and  guid- 

122 


The  Gospel  and  Law  123 

ing  star  of  our  historical  development.  Whether 
mankind  will  ever  attain  to  it,  who  can  say  ?  but 
we  can  and  ought  to  approximate  to  it,  and  in 
these  days — otherwise  than  two  or  three  hundred 
years  ago — we  feel  a  moral  obligation  in  this  di- 
rection. Those  of  us  who  possess  more  delicate 
and  therefore  more  prophetic  perceptions  no  longer 
regard  the  kingdom  of  love  and  peace  as  a  mere 
Utopia. 

But  for  this  very  reason  there  are  many  among  us 
to-day  upon  whom  a  very  serious  and  difficult  quest- 
ion presses  with  redoubled  force.  We  see  a  whole 
class  struggling  for  its  rights ;  or,  rather,  we  see  it 
struggling  to  extend  and  increase  its  rights.  Is  that 
compatible  with  the  Christian  temper  ?  Does  not 
the  Gospel  forbid  such  a  struggle  ?  Have  we  not 
been  told  that  we  are  to  renounce  the  rights  we 
have,  to  say  nothing  of  trying  to  get  more  ?  Must 
we,  then,  as  Christians,  recall  the  labouring  classes 
from  the  struggle  for  their  rights,  and  exhort  them 
only  to  patience  and  submission  ? 

The  problem  with  which  we  have  here  to  do  is 
also  stated  more  or  less  in  the  form  of  an  accusation 
against  Christianity.  Earnest  men  in  political  cir- 
cles of  a  socialistic  tendency,  who  would  gladly  be 
guided  by  Jesus  Christ,  complain  that  in  this  matter 
the  Gospel  leaves  them  in  the  lurch.  They  say  that 
it  imposes  restraint  upon  aspirations  which  with  a 


1 24  What  is  Christianity  ? 

clear  conscience  they  feel  to  be  justified ;  that  in  re- 
quiring absolute  meekness  and  submission  it  disarms 
everyone  who  wants  to  fight ;  that  it  narcotises,  as 
it  were,  all  real  energy.  Some  say  this  with  pain 
and  regret,  others  with  satisfaction.  The  latter  as- 
sert that  they  always  knew  that  the  Gospel  was  not 
for  the  healthy  and  the  strong,  but  for  the  broken- 
down  ;  that  it  knows,  and  wants  to  know,  nothing 
of  the  fact  that  life,  and  especially  modern  life,  is  a 
struggle,  a  struggle  for  one's  own  rights.  What 
answer  are  we  to  give  them  ? 

My  own  opinion  is  that  these  statements  and 
complaints  are  made  by  people  who  have  never  yet 
clearly  realised  with  what  it  is  that  the  Gospel  has 
to  do,  and  who  rashly  and  improperly  connect  it 
with  earthly  things.  The  Gospel  makes  its  appeal  to 
the  inner  man,  who,  whether  he  is  well  or  wounded, 
in  a  happy  position  or  a  miserable,  obliged  to 
spend  his  earthly  life  fighting  or  quietly  maintaining 
what  he  has  won,  always  remains  the  same.  **  My 
kingdom  is  not  of  this  world " ;  it  is  no  earthly 
kingdom  that  the  Gospel  establishes.  These  words 
not  only  exclude  such  a  political  theocracy  as  the 
Pope  aims  at  setting  up,  and  all  worldly  dominion ; 
they  have  a  much  wider  range.  Negatively  they 
forbid  all  direct  and  formal  interference  of  religion 
in  worldly  affairs.  Positively  what  the  Gospel  says 
is  this:  Whoever  you  may  be,  and  whatever  your 


The  Gospel  and  Law  125 

position,  whether  bondman  or  free,  whether  fighting 
or  at  rest — your  real  task  in  life  is  always  the  same. 
There  is  only  one  relation  and  one  idea  which  you 
must  not  violate,  and  in  the  face  of  which  all  others 
are  only  transient  wrappings  and  vain  show :  to  be 
a  child  of  God  and  a  citizen  of  His  kingdom,  and  to 
exercise  love.  How  you  are  to  maintain  yourself  in 
this  life  on  earth,  and  in  what  way  you  are  to  serve 
your  neighbour,  is  left  to  you  and  your  own  liberty 
of  action.  This  is  what  the  apostle  Paul  understood 
by  the  Gospel,  and  I  do  not  believe  that  he  misun- 
derstood it.  Then  let  us  fight,  let  us  struggle,  let 
us  get  justice  for  the  oppressed,  let  us  order  the 
circumstances  of  the  world  as  we  with  a  clear  con- 
science can,  and  as  we  may  think  best  for  our  neigh- 
bour; but  do  not  let  us.  expect  the  Gospel  to  afford 
us  any  direct  help ;  let  us  make  no  selfish  demands 
for  ourselves ;  and  let  us  not  forget  that  the  world 
passes  away,  not  only  with  the  lusts  thereof,  but 
also  with  its  regulations  and  its  goods!  Once  more 
be  it  said :  the  Gospel  knows  only  one  goal,  one 
idea ;  and  it  demands  of  a  man  that  he  shall  never  put 
them  aside.  If  the  exhortation  to  renounce  takes, 
in  a  harsh  and  one-sided  way,  a  foremost  place 
in  Jesus*  words,  we  must  be  careful  to  keep  before 
our  eyes  the  paramount  and  exclusive  claims  of  the 
relation  to  God  and  the  idea  of  love.  The  Gospel 
is  above   all   questions   of  mundane  development; 


126  What  is  Christianity? 

it  is  concerned,   not  with  material  things  but  with 
the  souls  of  men. 

With  this  we  have  already  passed  to  the  next 
question  which  was  to  occupy  our  attention,  and 
we  have  half  answered  it. 

(4)   The  Gospel  and  work,  or  the  question  of 
civilisation. 

The  points  which  we  shall  have  to  consider  here 
are  essentially  the  same  as  those  which  we  empha- 
sised in  regard  to  the  question  just  discussed;  and 
we  shall  therefore  be  able  to  proceed  more  concisely. 

Jesus'  teaching  has  been  felt  again  and  again,  but 
above  all  in  our  own  day,  to  exhibit  no  interest  in 
any  systematic  work  or  calling,  and  no  appreciation 
of  those  ideal  possessions  which  go  by  the  name  of 
Art  and  Science.  Nowhere,  people  say,  does  Jesus 
summon  men  to  labour  and  to  put  their  hands  to 
the  work  of  progress;  in  vain  shall  we  look  in  his 
words  for  any  expression  of  pleasure  in  vigorous  ac- 
tivity ;  these  ideal  possessions  lay  far  beyond  his 
field  of  vision.  In  that  last,  unhappy  book  of  his, 
The  Old  Faith  and  the  New,  David  Friedrich 
Strauss  gave  particularly  harsh  expression  to  this 
feeling.  He  speaks  of  a  fundamental  defect  in  the 
Gospel,  which  he  considers  antiquated  and  useless 
because  out  of  sympathy  with  the  progress  of  civil- 
isation.      But    long    before    Strauss   the    Pietistic 


Civilisation  127 

movement  exhibited  the  same  sort  of  feeling.  The 
Pietists  tried  to  evade  the  difficulty  in  a  way  of  their 
own.  They  started  from  the  position  that  Jesus 
must  be  able  to  serve  as  a  direct  example  for  all 
men,  whatever  their  calling;  that  he  must  have 
proved  himself  in  all  the  situations  in  which  a  man 
can  be  placed.  They  admitted  that  a  cursory  ex- 
amination of  Jesus'  life  disclosed  the  fact  that  this 
requirement  was  not  fulfilled ;  but  they  were  of 
opinion  that  on  a  closer  inspection  it  would  be 
found  that  he  was  really  the  best  bricklayer,  the  best 
tailor,  the  best  judge,  the  best  scholar,  and  so  on, 
and  that  he  had  the  best  knowledge  and  under- 
standing for  everything.  They  turned  and  twisted 
what  Jesus  said  and  did  until  it  was  made  to  express 
and  corroborate  what  they  wanted.  Although  it 
was  a  childish  attempt  which  they  made,  the  prob- 
lem of  which  they  were  sensible  was  nevertheless  of 
some  moment.  They  felt  that  their  consciences  and 
their  callings  bound  them  to  a  definite  activity  and 
a  definite  business;  they  were  clear  that  they  ought 
not  to  become  monks;  and  yet  they  were  anxious 
to  practise  the  imitation  of  Christ  in  the  full  sense. 
They  felt,  then,  that  he  must  have  stood  in  the 
same  situation  as  they  themselves,  and  that  his  hori- 
zon must  have  been  the  same  as  theirs. 

Here  we  have  the  same  case  as  we  dealt  with  in 
the  last  section,  only  covering  a  wider  field.     It  is 


128  What  is  Christianity? 

the  ancient  and  constantly  recurring  error,  that  the 
Gospel  has  to  do  with  the  affairs  of  the  world,  and 
that  it  is  its  business  to  prescribe  how  they  are  to  be 
carried  on.  Here,  too,  the  old  and  almost  ineradi- 
cable tendency  of  mankind  to  rid  itself  of  its  free- 
dom and  responsibility  in  higher  things  and  subject 
itself  to  a  law,  comes  into  play.  It  is  much  easier, 
in  fact,  to  resign  oneself  to  any,  even  the  sternest, 
kind  of  authority,  than  to  live  in  the  liberty  of  the 
good.  But,  apart  from  this,  the  question  remains: 
Is  it  not  a  real  defect  in  the  Gospel  that  it  betrays 
so  little  sympathy  with  the  business  of  life,  and  is 
out  of  touch  with  the  humaniora  in  the  sense  of  sci- 
ence, art,  and  civilisation  generally  ? 

I  answer,  in  the  first  place:  What  would  have 
been  gained  if  it  had  not  possessed  this  "  defect "  ? 
Suppose  that  it  had  taken  an  active  interest  in  all 
those  efforts,  would  it  not  have  become  entangled 
in  them,  or,  at  any  rate,  have  incurred  the  risk  of 
appearing  to  be  so  entangled?  Labour,  art,  science, 
the  progress  of  civilisation — these  are  not  things 
which  exist  in  the  abstract ;  they  exist  in  the  par- 
ticular phase  of  an  age.  The  Gospel,  then,  would 
have  had  to  ally  itself  with  them.  But  phases 
change.  In  the  Roman  Church  of  to-day  we  see 
how  heavily  religion  is  burdened  by  being  con- 
nected with  a  particular  epoch  of  civilisation.  In  the 
Middle  Ages  this  Church,  anxious  to  participate  to 


Civilisation  1 29 

the  full  in  all  questions  of  progress  and  civilisation, 
gave  them  form  and  shape,  and  laid  down  their 
laws.  Insensibly,  however,  the  Church  identified 
its  sacred  inheritance  and  its  peculiar  mission  with 
the  knowledge,  the  maxims,  and  the  interests  which 
it  then  acquired ;  so  that  it  is  now,  as  it  were,  firmly 
pinned  down  to  the  philosophy,  the  political  econ- 
omy, in  short,  to  the  whole  civilisation,  of  the  Mid- 
dle Ages.  On  the  other  hand,  what  a  service  the 
Gospel  has  rendered  to  mankind  by  having  sounded 
the  notes  of  religion  in  mighty  chords  and  banished 
every  other  melody ! 

In  the  second  place,  labour  and  the  progress  of 
civilisation  are,  no  doubt,  very  precious,  and  sum- 
mon us  to  strenuous  exertion.  But  they  do  not 
comprise  the  highest  ideal.  They  are  incapable  of 
filling  the  soul  with  real  satisfaction.  Although 
work  may  give  pleasure,  that  is  only  one  aspect  of 
the  matter.  I  have  always  found  that  the  people 
who  talk  loudest  about  the  pleasure  which  work 
affords  make  no  very  great  efforts  themselves; 
whilst  those  who  are  uninterruptedly  engaged  in 
heavy  labour  are  hesitating  in  its  praises.  As  a 
matter  of  fact,  there  is  a  great  deal  of  hypocritical 
twaddle  talked  about  work.  Three-fourths  of  it 
and  more  is  nothing  but  stupefying  toil,  and  the 
man  who  really  works  hard  shares  the  poet's  aspira- 
tions as  he  looks  forward  to  evening : 


I30  What  is  Christianity? 

Head,  hands  and  feet  rejoice  :   the  work  is  done. 

And  then,  think  of  the  results  of  all  this  labour! 
When  a  man  has  done  a  piece  of  work,  he  would 
like  to  do  it  over  again,  and  the  knowledge  of  its 
defects  falls  heavily  on  soul  and  conscience.  No! 
it  is  not  in  so  far  as  we  work  that  we  live,  but  in  so 
far  as  we  rejoice  in  the  love  of  others,  and  ourselves 
exercise  love.  Faust  is  right :  Labour  which  is 
labour  and  nothing  else  becomes  an  aversion.  We 
long  for  the  streams  of  living  water,  and  for  the 
spring  itself  from  which  those  waters  flow : 

Man  seknt  sick  nach  des  Lebens  Bdchen, 
Ach  !  nach  des  Lebens  Quelle  hui. 

Labour  is  a  valuable  safety-valve  and  useful  in 
keeping  off  greater  ills,  but  it  is  not  in  itself  an  ab- 
solute good,  and  we  cannot  include  it  amongst  our 
ideals.  The  same  may  be  said  of  the  progress  of 
civilisation.  It  is,  of  course,  to  be  welcomed ;  but 
the  piece  of  progress  in  which  we  delight  to-day 
becomes  something  mechanical  by  to-morrow,  and 
leaves  us  cold.  The  man  of  any  deep  feeling  will 
thankfully  receive  anything  that  the  development  of 
progress  may  bring  him  ;  but  he  knows  very  well  that 
his  situation  inwardly — the  problems  that  agitate  him 
and  the  fundamental  position  in  which  he  stands — 
is  not  essentially,  nay,  is  scarcely  even  unessen- 
tially, altered  by  it  all.     It  is  only  for  a  moment  that 


Civilisation  131 

it  seems  as  if  something  new  were  coming,  and  a 
man  were  being  really  relieved  of  his  burden.  Gen- 
tlemen, when  a  man  grows  older  and  sees  more 
deeply  into  life,  he  does  not  find,  if  he  possesses 
any  inner  world  at  all,  that  he  is  advanced  by  the 
external  march  of  things,  by  "  the  progress  of  civil- 
isation." Nay,  he  feels  himself,  rather,  where  he 
was  before,  and  forced  to  seek  the  sources  of 
strength  which  his  forefathers  also  sought.  He  is 
forced  to  make  himself  a  native  of  the  kingdom  of 
God,  the  kingdom  of  the  Eternal,  the  kingdom  of 
Love;  and  he  comes  to  understand  that  it  was  only 
of  this  kingdom  that  Jesus  Christ  desired  to  speak 
and  to  testify,  and  he  is  grateful  to  him  for  it. 

But,  in  the  third  place,  Jesus  had  a  strong  and 
positive  conviction  of  the  aggressive  and  forward 
character  of  his  message.  "  I  am  come  to  send  fire 
on  the  earth,  and  " — he  added — **  what  will  I  if  it 
be  already  kindled  ? "  The  fire  of  the  judgment 
and  the  forces  of  love  were  what  he  wanted  to  sum- 
mon up,  so  as  to  create  a  new  humanity.  If  he 
spoke  of  these  forces  of  love  in  the  simple  manner 
corresponding  to  the  conditions  nearest  at  hand — 
the  feeding  of  the  hungry,  the  clothing  of  the  naked, 
the  visiting  of  the  sick  and  those  in  prison — it  is 
nevertheless  clear  that  a  great  inward  transforma- 
tion of  the  humanity  which  he  saw  in  the  mirror  of 
the  little   nation   in   Palestine   hovered    before  his 


132  What  is  Christianity? 

eyes:  **  One  is  your  master,  and  all  ye  are  breth- 
ren." The  last  hour  is  come;  but  in  the  last  hour 
from  a  small  seed  a  tree  is  to  grow  up  which  shall 
spread  its  branches  far  and  wide.  Further,  he  was 
revealing  the  knowledge  of  God,  and  he  was  certain 
that  it  would  ripen  the  young,  strengthen  the  weak, 
and  make  them  God's  champions.  Knowledge  of 
God  is  the  spring  that  is  to  fructify  the  barren  field, 
and  pour  forth  streams  of  living  water.  In  this 
sense  he  spoke  of  it  as  the  highest  and  the  only 
necessary  good,  as  the  condition  of  all  edification, 
and,  we  may  also  say,  of  all  true  growth  and  pro- 
gress. Lastly,  he  saw  on  his  horizon  not  only  the 
judgment,  but  also  a  kingdom  of  justice,  of  love, 
and  of  peace,  which,  though  it  came  from  heaven, 
was  nevertheless  for  this  earth.  When  it  is  to 
come,  he  himself  knows  not — the  hour  is  known  to 
the  Father  only;  but  he  knows  how  and  by  what 
means  it  will  spread;  and  side  by  side  with  the 
highly  coloured,  dramatic  pictures  which  pass 
through  his  soul  there  are  quiet  perceptions  which 
are  fixed  and  steady.  He  sees  the  vineyard  of  God 
on  this  earth  and  God  calling  His  labourers  into  it 
— happy  the  man  who  receives  a  call !  They  labour 
in  the  vineyard,  stand  no  longer  idle  in  the  market- 
place, and  at  last  receive  their  reward.  Or  take  the 
parable  of  the  talents  distributed  in  order  to  be  em- 
ployed, and  therefore  not  to  be  buried  in  a  napkin. 


Chris  tology  133 

A  day's  work,  labour,  increase,  progress — he  sees  it 
all,  but  placed  at  the  service  of  God  and  neighbour, 
encircled  by  the  light  of  the  Eternal,  and  removed 
from  the  service  of  transient  things. 

To  sum  up  what  we  have  here  tried  to  indicate :  Is 
the  complaint  from  which  we  started  at  the  beginning 
of  this  section  justified  ?  Ought  we  really  to  desire 
that  the  Gospel  had  adapted  itself  to  "  the  progress 
of  civilisation"  ?  Here,  too,  I  think,  we  have  to 
learn  from  the  Gospel  and  not  to  find  fault  with  it. 
It  tells  us  of  the  real  work  which  humanity  has  to 
accomplish,  and  we  ought  not  to  meet  its  message 
by  entrenching  ourselves  behind  our  miserable 
**  work  of  civilisation."  **  The  image  of  Christ," 
as  a  modern  historian  justly  says,  **  remains  the 
sole  basis  of  all  moral  culture,  and  in  the  measure 
in  which  it  succeeds  in  making  its  light  penetrate 
is  the  moral  culture  of  the  nations  increased  or 
diminished." 

(5)   The  Gospel  and  the  Son  of  Gody  or  the 
Christological  quest  io7i. 

We  now  pass  from  the  sphere  of  questions  of 
which  we  have  been  treating  hitherto.  The  four 
previous  questions  are  all  intimately  connected  with 
one  another.  Failure  to  answer  them  rightly  always 
proceeds  from  not  rating  the  Gospel  high  enough ; 
from  somehow    or  other  dragging  it  down   to    the 


1 34  What  is  Christianity  ? 

level  of  mundane  questions  and  entangling  it  in 
them.  Or,  to  put  the  matter  differently:  The 
forces  of  the  Gospel  appeal  to  the  deepest  founda- 
tions of  human  existence  and  to  them  only;  it  is 
there  alone  that  their  leverage  is  applied.  If  a  man 
is  unable,  then,  to  go  down  to  the  root  of  humanity, 
and  has  no  feeling  for  it  and  no  knowledge  of  it,  he 
will  fail  to  understand  the  Gospel,  and  will  then  try 
to  profane  it  or  else  complain  that  it  is  of  no  use. 

We  now,  however,  approach  quite  a  different 
problem :  What  position  did  Jesus  himself  take  up 
towards  the  Gospel  while  he  was  proclaiming  it,  and 
how  did  he  wish  himself  to  be  accepted  ?  We  are 
not  yet  dealing  with  the  way  in  which  his  disciples 
accepted  him,  or  the  place  which  they  gave  him  in 
their  hearts,  and  the  opinion  which  they  formed  of 
him;  we  are  now  speaking  only  of  his  own  testi- 
mony of  himself.  But  the  question  is  one  which 
lands  us  in  the  great  sphere  of  controverted  ques- 
tions which  cover  the  history  of  the  Church  from 
the  first  century  up  to  our  own  time.  In  the  course 
of  this  controversy  men  put  an  end  to  brotherly  fel- 
lowship for  the  sake  of  a  finance ;  and  thousands 
were  cast  out,  condemned,  loaded  with  chains  and 
done  to  death.  It  is  a  gruesome  story.  On  the 
question  of  "  Christ ology  "  men  beat  their  religious 
doctrines  into  terrible  weapons,  and  spread  fear  and 
intimidation  everywhere.      This  attitude  still  con- 


Christology  135 

tinues:  Christology  is  treated  as  though  the  Gospel 
had  no  other  problem  to  offer,  and  the  accompany- 
ing fanaticism  is  still  rampant  in  our  own  day.  Who 
can  wonder  at  the  difficulty  of  the  problem,  weighed 
down  as  it  is  with  such  a  burden  of  history  and 
made  the  sport  of  parties?  Yet  anyone  who  will 
look  at  our  Gospels  with  unprejudiced  eyes  will  not 
find  that  the  question  of  Jesus'  own  testimony  is  in- 
soluble. So  much  of  it,  however,  as  remains  ob- 
scure and  mysterious  to  our  minds  ought  to  remain 
so;  as  Jesus  meant  it  to  be,  and  as,  in  the  very  na- 
ture of  the  problem,  it  is.  It  is  only  in  pictures  that 
we  can  give  it  expression.  **  There  are  phenomena 
which  cannot,  without  the  aid  of  symbols,  be 
brought  within  the  range  of  the  understanding." 

Before  we  examine  Jesus'  own  testimony  about 
himself,  two  leading  points  must  be  established. 
In  the  first  place,  he  desired  no  other  belief  in  his 
person  and  no  other  attachment  to  it  than  is  con- 
tained in  the  keeping  of  his  commandments.  Even 
in  the  fourth  Gospel,  in  which  Jesus'  person  often 
seems  to  be  raised  above  the  contents  of  the  Gospel, 
the  idea  is  still  clearly  formulated  :  "  If  ye  love  me, 
keep  my  commandments."  He  must  himself  have 
found,  during  his  labours,  that  some  people 
honoured,  nay,  even  trusted  him,  without  troubling 
themselves  about  the  contents  of  his  message.  It 
was   to   them   that   he   addressed   the    reprimand : 


136  What  is  Christianity? 

"  Not  everyone  that  saith  unto  me,  Lord,  Lord, 
shall  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  Heaven ;  but  he 
that  doeth  the  will  of  my  Father."  To  lay  down 
any  "  doctrine  "  about  his  person  and  his  dignity 
independently  of  the  Gospel  was,  then,  quite  out- 
side his  sphere  of  ideas.  In  the  second  place,  he 
described  the  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth  as  his  God 
and  his  Father;  as  the  Greater,  and  as  Him  who  is 
alone  good.  He  is  certain  that  everything  which 
he  has  and  everything  which  he  is  to  accomplish 
comes  from  this  Father.  He  prays  to  Him  ;  he  sub- 
jects himself  to  His  will;  he  struggles  hard  to  find 
out  what  it  is  and  to  fulfil  it.  Aim,  strength,  un- 
derstanding, the  issue,  and  the  hard  must,  all  come 
from  the  Father.  This  is  what  the  Gospels  say,  and 
it  cannot  be  turned  and  twisted.  This  feeling, 
praying,  working,  struggling,  and  suffering  individ- 
ual is  a  man  who  in  the  face  of  his  God  also  associ- 
ates himself  with  other  men. 

These  two  facts  mark  out,  as  It  were,  the  bound- 
aries of  the  ground  covered  by  Jesus'  testimony  of 
himself.  They  do  not,  it  is  true,  give  us  any  posi- 
tive information  as  to  what  he  said ;  but  we  shall 
understand  what  he  really  meant  by  his  testimony 
if  we  look  closely  at  the  two  descriptions  which  he 
gave  of  himself:  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Messiah 
(the  Son  of  David,  the  Son  of  Man). 

The  description  of  himself  as  the  Son   of  God, 


Christology  137 

Messianic  though  it  may  have  been  in  its  original 
conception,  lies  very  much  nearer  to  our  modern 
way  of  thinking  than  the  other,  for  Jesus  himself 
gave  a  meaning  to  this  conception  which  almost 
takes  it  out  of  the  class  of  Messianic  ideas,  or  at  all 
events  does  not  make  its  inclusion  in  that  class  ne- 
cessary to  a  proper  understanding  of  it.  On  the 
other  hand,  if  we  do  not  desire  to  be  put  off  with  a 
lifeless  word,  the  description  of  himself  as  the  Mes- 
siah is  at  first  blush  one  that  is  quite  foreign  to  our 
ideas.  Without  some  explanation  we  cannot  un- 
derstand, nay,  unless  we  are  Jews,  we  cannot  un- 
derstand at  all,  what  this  post  of  honour  means  and 
what  rank  and  character  it  possesses.  It  is  only 
when  we  have  ascertained  its  meaning  by  historical 
research  that  we  can  ask  whether  the  word  has  a 
significance  which  in  any  way  survives  the  destruc- 
tion of  the  husk  in  which  it  took  shape  in  Jewish 
political  life. 

Let  us  first  of  all  consider  the  designation,  "  Son 
of  God."  Jesus  in  one  of  his  discourses  made  it 
specially  clear  why  and  in  what  sense  he  gave  him- 
self this  name.  The  saying  is  to  be  found  in 
Matthew,  and  not,  as  might  perhaps  have  been  ex- 
pected, in  John:  "  No  man  knoweth  the  Son  but 
the  Father;  neither  knoweth  any  man  the  Father, 
save  the  Son,  and  he  to  whomsoever  the  Son  will 
reveal    him."      It    is    "  knowledge    of    God  "    that 


13S  What  is  Christianity? 

makes  the  sphere  of  the  Divine  Sonship.  It  is  in 
this  knowledge  that  he  came  to  know  the  sacred 
Being  who  rules  heaven  and  earth  as  Father,  as  his 
Father.  The  consciousness  which  he  possessed  of 
being  the  Son  of  God  is,  therefore,  nothing  but  the 
practical  consequence  of  knowing  God  as  the  Father 
and  as  his  Father.  Rightly  understood,  the  name 
of  Son  means  nothing  but  the  knowledge  of  God. 
Here,  however,  two  observations  are  to  be  made : 
Jesus  is  convinced  that  he  knows  God  in  a  way  in 
which  no  one  ever  knew  Him  before,  and  he  knows 
that  it  is  his  vocation  to  communicate  this  know- 
ledge of  God  to  others  by  word  and  by  deed — and 
with  it  the  knowledge  that  men  are  God's  children. 
In  this  consciousness  he  knows  himself  to  be  the 
Son  called  and  instituted  of  God,  to  be  the  Son  of 
God,  and  hence  he  can  say:  My  God  and  my 
Father,  and  into  this  invocation  he  puts  something 
which  belongs  to  no  one  but  himself.  How  he 
came  to  this  consciousness  of  the  unique  character 
of  his  relation  to  God  as  a  Son  ;  how  he  came  to  the 
consciousness  of  his  power,  and  to  the  conscious- 
ness of  the  obligation  and  the  mission  which  this 
power  carries  with  it,  is  his  secret,  and  no  psycho- 
logy will  ever  fathom  it.  The  confidence  with  which 
John  makes  him  address  the  Father:  "Thou 
lovedst  me  before  the  foundation  of  the  world" 
is   undoubtedly   the    direct    reflection    of   the    cer- 


Christology  139 

tainty  with  which  Jesus  himself  spoke.  Here  all 
research  must  stop.  We  are  not  even  able  to  say 
when  it  was  that  he  first  knew  himself  as  the  Son, 
and  whether  he  at  once  completely  identified  him- 
self with  this  idea  and  let  his  individuality  be  ab- 
sorbed in  it,  or  whether  it  formed  an  inner  problem 
which  kept  him  in  constant  suspense.  No  one  could 
fathom  this  mystery  who  had  not  had  a  parallel  ex- 
perience. A  prophet  may,  if  he  chooses,  try  to 
raise  the  veil,  but,  for  our  part,  we  must  be  content 
with  the  fact  that  this  Jesus  who  preached  humility 
and  knowledge  of  self,  nevertheless  named  himself 
and  himself  alone  as  the  Son  of  God.  He  is  certain 
that  he  knows  the  Father,  that  he  is  to  bring  this 
knowledge  to  all  men,  and  that  thereby  he  is  doing 
the  work  of  God.  Among  all  the  works  of  God 
this  is  the  greatest ;  it  is  the  aim  and  end  of  all 
creation.  The  work  is  given  to  him  to  do,  and  in 
God's  strength  he  will  accomplish  it.  It  was  out  of 
this  feeling  of  power  and  in  the  prospect  of  victory 
that  he  uttered  the  words :  "  The  Father  hath  com- 
mitted all  things  unto  me."  Again  and  again  in 
the  history  of  mankind  men  of  God  have  come  for- 
ward in  the  sure  consciousness  of  possessing  a  divine 
message,  and  of  being  compelled,  whether  they  will 
or  not,  to  deliver  it.  But  the  message  has  always 
happened  to  be  imperfect ;  in  this  spot  or  that,  de- 
fective;  bound  up  with  political  or  particularistic 


I40  What  is  Christianity? 

elements ;  designed  to  meet  the  circumstances  of  the 
moment;  and  very  often  the  prophet  did  not  stand 
the  test  of  being  himself  an  example  of  his  message. 
But  in  this  case  the  message  brought  was  of  the 
profoundest  and  most  comprehensive  character;  it 
went  to  the  very  root  of  mankind  and,  although  set 
in  the  framework  of  the  Jewish  nation,  it  addressed 
itself  to  the  whole  of  humanity — the  message  from 
God  the  Father.  Defective  it  is  not,  and  its  real 
kernel  may  be  readily  freed  from  the  inevitable  husk 
of  contemporary  form.  Antiquated  it  is  not,  and  in 
life  and  strength  it  still  triumphs  to-day  over  all  the 
past.  He  who  delivered  it  has  as  yet  yielded  his 
place  to  no  man,  and  to  human  life  he  still  to-day 
gives  a  meaning  and  an  aim — he  the  Son  of  God. 

This  already  brings  us  to  the  other  designation 
which  Jesus  gave  of  himself:  the  Messiah.  Before 
I  attempt  briefly  to  explain  it,  I  ought  to  mention 
that  some  scholars  of  note — and  among  them  Well- 
hausen — have  expressed  a  doubt  whether  Jesus  de- 
scribed himself  as  the  Messiah.  In  that  doubt  I 
cannot  concur;  nay,  I  think  that  it  is  only  by 
wrenching  what  the  evangelists  tell  us  off  its  hinges 
that  the  opinion  can  be  maintained.  The  very  ex- 
pression "  Son  of  Man  " — that  Jesus  used  it  is  be- 
yond question — seems  to  me  to  be  intelligible  only 
in  a  Messianic  sense.  To  say  nothing  of  anything 
else,  such  a  story  as  that  of  Christ's  entry  into  Jeru- 


The  Messiah  141 

salem  would  have  to  be  simply  expunged,  if  the 
theory  is  to  be  maintained  that  he  did  not  consider 
himself  the  promised  Messiah  and  also  desire  to  be 
accepted  as  such.  Moreover,  the  forms  in  which 
Jesus  expressed  what  he  felt  about  his  own  con- 
sciousness and  his  vocation  become  quite  incompre- 
hensible unless  they  are  taken  as  the  outcom.e  of 
the  Messianic  idea.  Finally,  the  positive  argu- 
ments which  are  advanced  in  support  of  the  theory 
are  either  so  very  weak,  or  else  so  highly  question- 
able, that  we  may  remain  quite  sure  that  Jesus  called 
himself  the  Messiah. 

The  idea  of  a  Messiah  and  the  Messianic  notions 
generally,  as  they  existed  in  Jesus'  day,  had  been 
developed  on  two  combined  lines,  on  the  line  of  the 
kings  and  on  that  of  the  prophets.  Alien  influences 
had  also  been  at  work,  and  the  whole  idea  was 
transfigured  by  the  ancient  expectation  that  God 
Himself  in  visible  form  would  take  up  the  govern- 
ment of  His  people.  The  leading  features  of  the 
Messianic  idea  were  taken  from  the  Israelitish  king- 
dom in  the  ideal  splendour  in  which  it  was  invested 
after  the  kingdom  itself  had  disappeared.  Mem- 
ories of  Moses  and  of  the  great  prophets  also  played 
a  part  in  it.  In  the  following  lecture  we  shall 
briefly  show  what  shapes  the  Messianic  hopes  had 
assumed  up  to  Jesus'  time,  and  in  what  v/ay  he  took 
them  up  and  transformed  them. 


LECTURE   VIII 

ALTHOUGH  the  Messianic  doctrines  prevalent 
in  the  Jewish  nation  in  Jesus*  day  were  not  a 
positive  **  dogma,"  and  had  no  connexion  with  the 
legal  precepts  which  were  so  rigidly  cultivated,  they 
formed  an  essential  element  of  the  hopes,  religious 
and  political,  which  the  nation  entertained  for  the 
future.  They  were  of  no  very  definite  character,  ex- 
cept in  certain  fundamental  features ;  beyond  these 
the  greatest  differences  prevailed.  The  old  prophets 
had  looked  forth  to  a  glorious  future  in  which  God 
would  Himself  come  down,  destroy  the  enemies  of 
Israel,  and  work  justice,  peace,  and  joy.  At  the 
same  time,  however,  they  had  also  promised  that  a 
wise  and  mighty  king  of  the  house  of  David  would 
appear  and  bring  this  glorious  state  of  things  to 
pass.  They  had  ended  by  indicating  the  people  of 
Israel  itself  as  the  Son  of  God,  chosen  from  amongst 
the  nations  of  the  world.  These  three  views  exer- 
cised a  determining  influence  in  the  subsequent 
elaboration  of  the  Messianic  ideas.  The  hope  of  a 
glorious  future  for  the  people  of  Israel  remained  the 
frame  into  which  all  expectations  were  fitted,  but  in 

142 


The  Messiah  143 

the  two  centuries  before  Christ  the  following  factors 
were  added:  (i.)  The  extension  of  their  historical 
horizon  strengthened  the  interest  of  the  Jews  in  the 
nations  of  the  world,  introduced  the  notion  of 
"  mankind  "  as  a  whole,  and  brought  it  within  the 
sphere  of  the  expected  end,  including,  therefore, 
the  operations  of  the  Messiah.  The  day  of  judg- 
ment is  regarded  as  extending  to  the  whole  world, 
and  the  Messiah  not  only  as  judging  the  world  but 
as  ruling  it  as  well,  (ii.)  In  early  times,  although 
the  moral  purification  of  the  people  had  been 
thought  of  in  connexion  with  the  glorious  future, 
the  destruction  of  Israel's  enemies  seemed  to  be  the 
main  consideration ;  but  now  the  feeling  of  moral 
responsibility  and  the  knowledge  of  God  as  the 
Holy  One  became  more  active;  the  view  prevails 
that  the  Messianic  age  demands  a  holy  people,,  and 
that  the  judgment  to  come  must  of  necessity  also 
be  a  judgment  upon  a  part  of  Israel  itself,  (iii.)  As 
individualism  became  a  stronger  force,  so  the  rela- 
tion of  God  to  the  individual  was  prominently  em- 
phasised. The  individual  Israelite  comes  to  feel 
that  he  is  in  the  midst  of  his  people,  and  he  begins 
to  look  upon  it  as  a  sum  of  individuals;  the  indi- 
vidual belief  in  Providence  appears  side  by  side 
with  the  political  belief,  and  combines  with  the 
feeling  of  personal  worth  and  responsibility ;  and  in 
connexion  with  the  expectation  of  the  end,  we  get 


144  What  is  Christianity? 

the  first  dawn  of  the  hope  of  an  eternal  life  and  the 
fear  of  eternal  punishment.  The  products  of  this 
inner  development  are  an  interest  in  personal  salva- 
tion, and  a  belief  in  the  resurrection ;  and  the  roused 
conscience  is  no  longer  able  to  hope  for  a  glorious 
future  for  all  in  view  of  the  open  profanity  of  the 
people  and  the  power  of  sin ;  only  a  remnant  will 
be  saved.  (iv.)  The  expectations  for  the  future 
become  more  and  more  transcendent ;  they  are  in- 
creasingly shifted  to  the  realm  of  the  supernatural 
and  the  supramundane;  something  quite  new  comes 
down  from  heaven  to  earth,  and  the  new  course  on 
which  the  world  enters  severs  it  from  the  old ;  nay, 
this  earth,  transfigured  as  it  will  be,  is  no  longer  the 
final  goal;  the  idea  of  an  absolute  bliss  arises,  whose 
abode  can  only  be  heaven  itself,  (v.)  The  person- 
ality of  the  long-expected  Messiah  is  sharply  distin- 
guished, as  well  from  the  idea  of  an  earthly  king  as 
from  the  idea  of  the  people  as  a  whole,  and  from 
the  idea  of  God.  Although  he  appears  as  a  man 
amongst  men,  the  Messiah  retains  scarcely  any 
Messianic  traits.  He  is  represented  as  with  God 
from  the  first  beginnings  of  time;  he  comes  down 
from  heaven,  and  accomplishes  his  work  by  super- 
human means;  the  moral  traits  in  the  picture  formed 
of  him  come  into  prominence;  he  is  the  perfectly 
just  man  who  fulfils  all  the  commandments.  Nay, 
the  idea  that  others  benefit  by  his  merits  forces  its 


The  Messiah  145 

way  in.  The  notion,  however,  of  a  suffering  Mes- 
siah, which  might  seem  to  be  suggested  by  Isaiah 
liii.,  is  not  reached. 

But  none  of  these  speculations  succeeded  in  dis- 
placing the  older  and  simpler  conceptions,  or  in 
banishing  that  original,  patriotic,  and  political  in- 
terpretation of  them  with  which  the  great  majority 
of  the  people  were  familiar.  God  Himself  assuming 
the  sceptre,  destroying  His  enemies,  founding  the 
Israelitish  kingdom  of  the  world,  and  availing  Him- 
self of  a  kingly  champion  for  the  purpose;  every 
man  sitting  under  his  own  fig-tree,  in  his  own  vine- 
yard, enjoying  the  fruits  of  peace,  with  his  foot 
upon  the  neck  of  his  enemies — that  was,  after  all, 
still  the  most  popular  conception  of  the  coming  of 
the  Messiah,  and  it  was  fixed  in  the  minds  even  of 
those  who  were  at  the  same  time  attracted  to  higher 
views.  But  a  portion  of  the  people  had  undoubt- 
edly awakened  to  the  feeling  that  the  kingdom  of 
God  presupposes  a  moral  condition  of  a  correspond- 
ing character,  and  that  it  could  come  only  to  a 
righteous  people.  Some  looked  to  acquiring  this 
righteousness  by  means  of  a  punctilious  observance 
of  the  law,  and  no  zeal  that  they  could  show  for  it 
was  enough;  others,  under  the  influences  of  a 
deeper  self-knowledge,  began  to  have  a  dim  idea 
that  the  righteousness  which  they  so  ardently  de- 
sired could  itself  come  only  from  the  hand  of  God, 


14^  What  is  Christianity? 

and  that  in  order  to  shake  off  the  burden  of  sin — 
for  they  had  begun  to  be  tortured  by  an  inner  sense 
of  it — divine  assistance,  and  divine  grace  and  mercy, 
were  needful. 

Thus  in  Christ's  time  there  was  a  surging  chaos  of 
disparate  feeling,  as  well  as  of  contradictory  theory, 
in  regard  to  this  one  matter.  At  no  other  time,  per- 
haps, in  the  history  of  religion,  and  in  no  other  peo- 
ple, were  the  most  extreme  antitheses  so  closely 
associated  under  the  binding  influence  of  religion. 
At  one  moment  the  horizon  seems  as  narrow  as  the 
circle  of  the  hills  which  surround  Jerusalem ;  at  an- 
other it  embraces  all  mankind.  Here  everything  is 
put  upon  a  high  plane  and  regarded  from  the  spirit- 
ual and  moral  point  of  view;  and  there,  at  but  a 
stone's  throw,  the  whole  drama  seems  as  though  it 
must  close  with  a  political  victory  for  the  nation. 
In  one  group  all  the  forces  of  divine  trust  and  con- 
fidence are  disengaged,  and  the  upright  man  struggles 
through  to  a  solemn  "  Nevertheless";  in  another, 
every  religious  impulse  is  stifled  by  a  morally  ob- 
tuse, patriotic  fanaticism. 

The  idea  which  was  formed  of  the  Messiah  must 
have  been  as  contradictory  as  the  hopes  to  which  it 
was  meant  to  respond.  Not  only  were  people's 
formal  notions  about  him  continually  changing — 
questions  were  being  raised,  for  instance,  as  to 
the  sort   of  bodily  nature  which  he  would  have; 


The  Messiah  147 

above  all,  his  inmost  character  and  the  work  to 
which  he  was  to  be  called  appeared  in  diverse 
lights.  But  wherever  the  moral  and  really  re- 
ligious elements  had  begun  to  get  the  upper  hand, 
people  were  forced  to  abandon  the  image  of  the  po- 
litical and  warlike  ruler,  and  let  that  of  the  prophet ^ 
which  had  always  to  some  extent  helped  to  form 
the  general  notions  about  the  Messiah,  take  its 
place.  That  he  would  bring  God  near ;  that  some- 
how or  other  he  would  do  justice;  that  he  would  de- 
liver from  the  burden  of  torment  within — this  was 
what  was  hoped  of  him.  The  story  of  John  the 
Baptist  as  related  in  our  Gospels  makes  it  clear  that 
there  were  devout  men  in  the  Jewish  nation  at  that 
time  who  were  expecting  a  Messiah  in  this  form,  or 
at  least  did  not  absolutely  reject  the  idea.  We  learn 
from  that  story  that  some  were  disposed  to  take 
John  for  the  Messiah.  What  elasticity  the  Messi- 
anic ideas  must  have  possessed,  and  how  far,  in 
certain  circles,  they  must  have  travelled  from  the 
form  which  they  originally  assumed,  when  this  very 
unkinglike  preacher  of  repentance,  clad  in  a  garment 
of  camel's  hair,  and  with  no  message  but  that  the 
nation  had  degenerated  and  its  day  of  judgment 
was  at  hand,  could  be  taken  for  the  Messiah  him- 
self! And  when  the  Gospels  go  on  to  tell  us  that 
not  a  few  among  the  people  took  Jesus  for  the  Mes- 
siah only  because  he  taught  as  one  with  authority. 


148  What  is  Christianity? 

and  worked  miraculous  cures,  how  fundamentally 
the  idea  of  the  Messiah  seems  to  be  changed  !  They 
regarded  this  saving  activity,  it  is  true,  only  as  the 
beginning  of  his  mission ;  they  expected  that  the 
wonder-worker  would  presently  throw  off  his  dis- 
guise and  **  set  up  the  kingdom  " ;  but  all  that  we 
are  concerned  with  here  is  that  they  were  capable  of 
welcoming  as  the  promised  one  a  man  whose  origin 
and  previous  life  they  knew,  and  who  had  as  yet 
done  nothing  but  preach  repentance  and  proclaim 
that  the  kingdom  of  heaven  was  at  hand.  We  shall 
never  fathom  the  inward  development  by  which 
Jesus  passed  from  the  assurance  that  he  was  the 
Son  of  God  to  the  other  assurance  that  he  was  the 
promised  Messiah.  But  when  we  see  that  the  idea 
which  others  as  well  had  formed  of  the  Messiah  at 
that  time  had,  by  a  slow  process  of  change,  devel- 
oped entirely  new  features,  and  had  passed  from  a 
political  and  religious  idea  into  a  spiritual  and  re- 
ligious one — when  we  see  this,  the  problem  no  longer 
wears  a  character  of  complete  isolation.  That  John 
the  Baptist  and  the  twelve  disciples  acknowledged 
Jesus  to  be  the  Messiah;  that  the  positive  estimate 
which  they  formed  ot  his  person  did  not  lead  them 
to  reject  the  shape  in  which  he  appeared,  but,  on 
the  contrary,  was  fixed  in  this  very  shape,  is  a  proof 
of  the  flexible  character  of  the  Messianic  idea  at  the 
time,  and  also  explains  how  it  was  that  Jesus  could 


The  Messiah  149 

himself  adopt  it.  **  Strength  is  made  perfect  in 
weakness."  That  there  is  a  divine  strength  and 
glory  which  stands  in  no  need  of  earthly  power  and 
earthly  splendour,  nay,  excludes  them;  that  there 
is  a  majesty  of  holiness  and  love  which  saves  and 
blesses  those  upon  whom  it  lays  hold,  was  what  he 
knew  who  in  spite  of  his  lowliness  called  himself  the 
Messiah,  and  the  same  must  have  been  felt  by  those 
who  recognised  him  as  the  king  of  Israel  anointed 
of  God. 

How  Jesus  arrived  at  the  consciousness  of  being 
the  Messiah  we  cannot  explain,  but  still  there  are 
some  points  connected  with  the  question  which  can 
be  established.  An  inner  event  which  Jesus  experi- 
enced at  his  baptism  was,  in  the  view  of  the  oldest 
tradition,  the  foundation  of  his  Messianic  conscious- 
ness. It  is  not  an  experience  which  is  subject  to 
any  criticism ;  still  less  are  we  in  a  position  to  con- 
tradict it.  On  the  contrary,  there  is  a  strong  proba- 
bility that  when  he  made  his  public  appearance  he 
had  already  settled  accounts  with  himself.  The 
evangelists  preface  their  account  of  his  public  ac- 
tivity with  a  curious  story  of  a  temptation.  This 
story  assumes  that  he  was  already  conscious  of  be- 
ing the  Son  of  God  and  the  one  who  was  intrusted 
with  the  all-important  work  for  God's  people,  and 
that  he  had  overcome  the  temptations  which  this 
consciousness  brought  with  it.     When  John  sent  to 


150  What  is  Christianity? 

him  from  prison  to  ask,  "Art  thou  he  that  should 
come,  or  do  we  look  for  another  ?  "  the  answer 
which  he  sent  necessarily  led  his  questioner  to  un- 
derstand that  he  was  the  Messiah,  but  at  the  same 
time  showed  him  how  Jesus  conceived  the  Messi- 
anic office.  Then  came  the  day  at  Caesarea  Philippi, 
when  Peter  acknowledged  him  as  the  expected  Mes- 
siah, and  Jesus  joyfully  confirmed  what  he  said. 
This  was  followed  by  the  question  to  the  Pharisees, 
— "  What  think  ye  of  Christ,  whose  son  is  he  ?  " — 
the  scene  which  ended  with  the  fresh  question:  **  If 
David  then  call  him  Lord,  how  is  he  his  son?" 
Lastly,  there  was  the  entry  into  Jerusalem  before 
the  whole  people,  together  with  the  cleansing  of  the 
temple ;  actions  which  were  equivalent  to  a  public 
declaration  that  he  was  the  Messiah.  But  his  first 
unequivocal  Messianic  action  was  also  his  last.  It 
was  followed  by  the  crown  of  thorns  and  the  cross. 
I  have  said  that  it  is  probable  that  when  Jesus 
made  his  public  appearance  he  had  already  settled 
accounts  with  himself,  and  was  therefore  clear  about 
his  mission  as  well.  By  this,  however,  I  do  not 
mean  that,  so  far  as  he  himself  was  concerned,  he 
had  nothing  more  to  learn  in  the  course  of  it.  Not 
only  had  he  to  learn  to  suffer,  and  to  look  forward 
to  the  cross  with  confidence  in  God,  but  the  con- 
sciousness of  his  Sonship  was  now  for  the  first  time 
to  be  brought  to  the  test.     The  knowledge  of  the 


The  Messiah  151 

*  *  work  ' '  which  the  Father  had  intrusted  to  him  could 
not  be  developed  except  by  labour  and  by  victory 
over  all  opposition.  What  a  moment  it  must  have 
been  for  him  when  he  recognised  that  he  was  the 
one  of  whom  the  prophets  had  spoken ;  when  he 
saw  the  whole  history  of  his  nation  from  Abraham 
and  Moses  downwards  in  the  light  of  his  own  mis- 
sion ;  when  he  could  no  longer  avoid  the  conviction 
that  he  was  the  promised  Messiah!  No  longer 
avoid  it ;  for  how  can  we  refuse  to  believe  that  at 
first  he  must  have  felt  this  knowledge  to  be  a  terri- 
ble burden  ?  Yet  in  saying  this  we  have  gone  too 
far;  and  there  is  nothing  more  that  we  can  say. 
But  in  this  connexion  we  can  understand  that  the 
evangelist  John  was  right  in  making  Jesus  testify 
over  and  over  again  :  "  I  have  not  spoken  of  myself; 
but  the  Father  which  sent  me;  he  gave  me  a  com- 
mandment, what  I  should  say,  and  what  I  should 
speak.'*  And  again:  "  For  I  am  not  alone,  but  I 
and  the  Father  that  sent  me." 

But  however  we  may  conceive  the  "  Messiah,"  it 
was  an  assumption  that  was  simply  necessary  if  the 
man  who  felt  the  inward  call  was  to  gain  an  absol- 
ute recognition  within  the  lines  of  Jewish  religious 
history — the  profoundest  and  maturest  history  that 
any  nation  ever  possessed,  nay,  as  the  future  was  to 
show,  the  true  religious  history   for   all  mankind. 


3  52  What  is  Christianity? 

The  idea  of  the  Messiah  became  the  means — in  the 
first  instance  for  the  devout  of  his  own  nation — of 
effectively  setting  the  man  who  knew  that  he  was 
the  Son  of  God,  and  was  doing  the  work  of  God,  on 
the  throne  of  history.  But  when  it  had  accom- 
pHshed  this,  its  mission  was  exhausted.  Jesus  was 
the  "  Messiah,"  and  was  not  the  Messiah;  and  he 
was  not  the  Messiah,  because  he  left  the  idea  far 
behind  him  ;  because  he  put  a  meaning  into  it  which 
was  too  much  for  it  to  bear.  Although  the  idea 
may  strike  us  as  strange  we  can  still  feel  some  of  its 
meaning ;  an  idea  which  captivated  a  whole  nation 
for  centuries,  and  in  which  it  deposited  all  its  ideals, 
cannot  be  quite  unintelligible.  In  the  prospect  of 
a  Messianic  period  we  see  once  more  the  old  hope 
of  a  golden  age ;  the  hope  which,  when  moralised, 
must  necessarily  be  the  goal  of  every  vigorous 
movement  in  human  life  and  forms  an  inahenable 
element  in  the  religious  view  of  history;  in  the  ex- 
pectation of  a  personal  Messiah  we  see  an  expres- 
sion of  the  fact  that  it  \s persons  who  form  the  saving 
element  in  history,  and  that  if  a  union  of  mankind 
is  ever  to  come  about  by  their  deepest  forces  and 
highest  aims  being  brought  into  accord,  this  same 
mankind  must  agree  to  acknowledge  one  lord  and 
master.  But  beyond  this  there  is  no  other  meaning 
and  no  other  value  to  be  attached  to  the  Messianic 
idea;  Jesus  himself  deprived  it  of  them. 


Christology  153 

With  the  recognition  of  Jesus  as  the  Messiah 
the  closest  possible  connexion  was  established,  for 
every  devout  Jew,  between  Jesus'  message  and  his 
person;  for  it  is  in  the  Messiah's  activity  that  God 
Himself  comes  to  His  people,  and  the  Messiah  who 
does  God's  work  and  sits  at  the  right  hand  of  God 
in  the  clouds  of  heaven  has  a  right  to  be  worshipped. 
But  what  attitude  did  Jesus  himself  take  up  towards 
his  Gospel  ?  Does  he  assume  a  position  in  it  ?  To 
this  question  there  are  two  answers :  one  negative 
and  one  positive. 

In  those  leading  features  of  it  which  we  described 
in  the  earlier  lectures  the  whole  of  the  Gospel  is 
contained,  and  we  must  keep  it  free  from  the  intru- 
sion of  any  alien  element:  God  and  the  soul,  the 
soul  and  its  God.  There  was  no  doubt  in  Jesus' 
mind  that  God  could  be  found,  and  had  been  found, 
in  the  law  and  the  prophets.  "  He  hath  showed 
thee,  O  man,  what  is  good;  and  what  doth  the 
Lord  require  of  thee,  but  to  do  justly,  and  to  love 
mercy,  and  to  walk  humbly  with  thy  God?"  He 
takes  the  publican  in  the  temple,  the  widow  and  her 
mite,  the  lost  son,  as  his  examples;  none  of  them 
know  anything  about  "  Christology,"  and  yet  by 
his  humility  the  publican  was  justified.  These  are 
facts  which  cannot  be  turned  and  twisted  without 
doing  violence  to  the  grandeur  and  simplicity  of 
Jesus'  message  in  one  of  its  most  important  aspects. 


1 54  What  is  Christianity  ? 

To  contend  that  Jesus  meant  his  whole  message  to 
be  taken  provisionally,  and  everything  in  it  to  re- 
ceive a  different  interpretation  after  his  death  and 
resurrection,  nay,  parts  of  it  to  be  put  aside  as  of  no 
account,  is  a  desperate  supposition.  No!  his  mes- 
sage is  simpler  than  the  churches  would  like  to  think 
it ;  simpler,  but  for  that  very  reason  sterner  and  en- 
dowed with  a  greater  claim  to  universality.  A  man 
cannot  evade  it  by  the  subterfuge  of  saying  that  as 
he  can  make  nothing  of  this  **  Christology  "  the 
message  is  not  for  him.  Jesus  directed  men's  at- 
tention to  great  questions;  he  promised  them  God's 
grace  and  mercy;  he  required  them  to  decide 
whether  they  would  have  God  or  Mammon,  an 
eternal  or  an  earthly  life,  the  soul  or  the  body,  hu- 
mility or  self-righteousness,  love  or  selfishness,  the 
truth  or  a  lie.  The  sphere  which  these  questions 
occupy  is  all-embracing;  the  individual  is  called 
upon  to  listen  to  the  glad  message  of  mercy  and  the 
Fatherhood  of  God,  and  to  make  up  his  mind 
whether  he  will  be  on  God's  side  and  the  Eternal's, 
or  on  the  side  of  the  world  and  of  time.  The  Gos- 
pel, as  Jesus  proclaimed  it,  has  to  do  with  the  Father 
only  and  not  with  the  Son.  This  is  no  paradox,  nor, 
on  the  other  hand,  is  it  **  rationalism,"  but  the  sim- 
ple expression  of  the  actual  fact  as  the  evangelists 
give  it. 

But  no  one  had  ever  yet  known  the  Father  in  the 


Christology  155 

way  in  which  Jesus  knew  Him,  and  to  this  know- 
ledge of  Him  he  draws  other  men's  attention,  and 
thereby  does  "the  many"  an  incomparable  service. 
He  leads  them  to  God,  not  only  by  what  he  says, 
but  still  more  by  what  he  is  and  does,  and  ultim- 
ately by  what  he  suffers.  It  was  in  this  sense 
that  he  spoke  the  words,  **  Come  unto  me,  all  ye 
that  labour  and  are  heavy  laden,  and  I  will  give 
you  rest  ";  as  also,  **  The  Son  of  Man  came  not  to 
be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister,  and  to  give  his 
life  a  ransom  for  many."  He  knows  that  through 
him  a  new  epoch  is  beginning,  in  which,  by  their 
knowledge  of  God,  the  "  least  "  shall  be  greater 
than  the  greatest  of  the  ages  before ;  he  knows  that 
in  him  thousands  —  the  very  individuals  who  are 
weary  and  heavy  laden — will  find  the  Father  and 
gain  life ;  he  knows  that  he  is  the  sower  who  is  scat- 
tering good  seed ;  his  is  the  field,  his  the  seed,  his 
the  fruit.  These  things  involve  no  dogmatic  doc- 
trines; still  less  any  transformation  of  the  Gospel 
itself,  or  any  oppressive  demands  upon  our  faith. 
They  are  the  expression  of  an  actual  fact  which  he 
perceives  to  be  already  happening,  and  which,  with 
prophetic  assurance,  he  beholds  in  advance.  When, 
under  the  terrible  burden  of  his  calling  and  in  the 
midst  of  the  struggle,  he  comes  to  see  that  it  is 
through  him  that  the  blind  see,  the  lame  walk,  the 
deaf  hear,  the  poor  have  the  Gospel  preached  to 


156  What  is  Christianity? 

them,  he  begins  to  comprehend  the  glory  which  the 
Father  has  given  him.  And  he  sees  that  what  he 
now  suffers  in  his  person  will,  through  his  life 
crowned  in  death,  remain  a  fact  efficacious  and  of 
critical  importance  for  all  time :  He  is  the  way  to 
the  Father,  and  as  he  is  the  appointed  of  the  Father, 
so  he  is  the  Judge  as  well. 

Was  he  mistaken  ?  Neither  his  immediate  pos- 
terity, nor  the  course  of  subsequent  history,  has  de- 
cided against  him.  It  is  not  as  a  mere  factor  that 
he  is  connected  with  the  Gospel ;  he  was  its  personal 
realisation  and  its  strength,  and  this  he  is  felt  to  be 
still.  Fire  is  kindled  only  by  fire;  personal  life 
only  by  personal  forces.  Let  us  rid  ourselves  of 
all  dogmatic  sophistry,  and  leave  others  to  pass 
verdicts  of  exclusion.  The  Gospel  nowhere  says 
that  God's  mercy  is  limited  to  Jesus'  mission. 
But  history  shows  us  that  he  is  the  one  who  brings 
the  weary  and  heavy  laden  to  God ;  and,  again,  that 
he  it  was  who  raised  mankind  to  the  new  level; 
and  his  teaching  is  still  the  touchstone,  in  that  it 
brings  men  to  bliss  and  brings  them  to  judgment. 

The  sentence  *'  I  am  the  Son  of  God  "  was  not 
inserted  in  the  Gospel  by  Jesus  himself,  and  to  put 
that  sentence  there  side  by  side  with  the  others  is 
to  make  an  addition  to  the  Gospel.  But  no  one 
who  accepts  the  Gospel,  and  tries  to  understand 
him  who  gave  it  to  us,  can  fail  to  affirm  that  here 


The  Creed  157 

the  divine  appeared  in  as  pure  a  form  as  it  can  ap- 
pear on  earth,  and  to  feel  that  for  those  who  fol- 
lowed him  Jesus  was  himself  the  strength  of  the 
Gospel.  What  they  experienced,  however,  and 
came  to  know  in  and  through  him,  they  have  told 
the  world ;  and  their  message  is  still  a  living  force. 

(6)   The  Gospel  and  doctrine^  or  the  question  of  creed. 

We  need  not  dwell  long  on  this  question,  as  on 
the  essential  points — everything  that  it  is  necessary 
to  say  has  already  been  said  in  the  course  of  our 
previous  observations. 

The  Gospel  is  no  theoretical  system  of  doctrine 
or  philosophy  of  the  universe;  it  is  doctrine  only  in 
so  far  as  it  proclaims  the  reality  of  God  the  Father. 
It  is  a  glad  message  assuring  us  of  life  eternal,  and 
telling  us  what  the  things  and  the  forces  with  which 
we  have  to  do  are  worth.  By  treating  of  life  eter- 
nal it  teaches  us  how  to  lead  our  lives  aright.  It 
tells  us  of  the  value  of  the  human  soul,  of  humility, 
of  mercy,  of  purity,  of  the  cross,  and  the  worthless- 
ness  of  worldly  goods  and  anxiety  for  the  things  of 
which  earthly  life  consists.  And  it  gives  the  assur- 
ance that,  in  spite  of  every  struggle,  peace,  certainty, 
and  something  within  that  can  never  be  destroyed 
will  be  the  crown  of  a  life  rightly  led.  What  else 
can  **  the  confession  of  a  creed  "  mean  under  these 
conditions  but  to  do  the  will  of  God,  in  the  cer- 


158  What  is  Christianity? 

tainty  that  He  is  the  Father  and  the  one  who  will 
recompense  ?  Jesus  never  spoke  of  any  other  kind 
of  **  creed."  Even  when  he  says,  **  Whosoever 
shall  confess  me  before  men,  him  will  I  confess  also 
before  my  Father  which  is  in  heaven,"  he  is  think- 
ing of  people  doing  as  he  did  ;  he  means  the  confes- 
sion which  shows  itself  in  feeling  and  action.  How 
great  a  departure  from  what  he  thought  and 
enjoined  is  involved  in  putting  a  Christological 
creed  in  the  forefront  of  the  Gospel,  and  in  teach- 
ing that  before  a  man  can  approach  it  he  must  learn 
to  think  rightly  about  Christ.  That  is  putting  the 
cart  before  the  horse.  A  man  can  think  and  teach 
rightly  about  Christ  only  if,  and  in  so  far  as,  he  has 
already  begun  to  live  according  to  Christ's  Gospel. 
There  is  no  forecourt  to  his  message  through  which 
a  man  must  pass;  no  yoke  which  he  must  first  of 
all  take  upon  himself.  The  thoughts  and  assurances 
which  the  Gospel  provides  are  the  first  thing  and 
the  last  thing,  and  every  soul  is  directly  arraigned 
before  them. 

Still  less,  however,  does  the  Gospel  presuppose 
any  definite  knowledge  of  nature,  or  stand  in  any 
connexion  with  such  knowledge;  not  even  in  a 
negative  sense  can  this  contention  be  maintained. 
It  is  religion  and  the  moral  element  that  are  con- 
cerned. The  Gospel  puts  the  living  God  before  us. 
Here,  too,  the  confession  of  Him  in  belief  in  Him 


The  Creed  159 

and  in  the  fulfilment  of  His  will  is  the  sole  thing  to 
be  confessed;  this  is  what  Jesus  Christ  meant.  So 
far  as  the  knowledge  is  concerned — and  it  is  vast — 
which  may  be  based  upon  this  belief,  it  always 
varies  with  the  measure  of  a  man's  inner  develop- 
ment and  subjective  intelligence.  But  to  possess 
the  Lord  of  heaven  and  earth  as  a  Father  is  an  ex- 
perience to  which  nothing  else  approaches ;  and  it 
is  an  experience  which  the  poorest  soul  can  have, 
and  to  the  reality  of  which  he  can  bear  testimony. 

An  experience — it  is  only  the  religion  which  a 
man  has  himself  experienced  that  is  to  be  confessed  ; 
every  other  creed  or  confession  is  in  Jesus*  view 
hypocritical  and  fatal.  If  there  is  no  broad 
**  theory  of  religion  "  to  be  found  in  the  Gospel, 
still  less  is  there  any  direction  that  a  man  is  to 
begin  by  accepting  and  confessing  any  ready-made 
theory.  Faith  and  creed  are  to  proceed  and  grow 
up  out  of  the  all-important  act  of  turning  from  the 
world  and  to  God,  and  creed  is  to  be  nothing  but 
faith  reduced  to  practice.  *'  All  men  have  not 
faith,"  says  the  apostle  Paul,  but  all  men  ought  to 
be  veracious  and  be  on  their  guard  in  religion 
against  lip-service  and  light-hearted  assent  to 
creeds.  **  A  certain  man  had  two  sons;  and  he 
came  to  the  first  and  said,  Son,  go  work  to-day  in 
my  vineyard.  He  answered  and  said,  I  will  not; 
but  afterward  he  repented  and  went.     And  he  came 


i6o  What  is  Christianity? 

to    the    second,    and    said    likewise.     And    he    an- 
swered and  said,  I  go,  sir;  and  went  not." 

I  might  stop  here,  but  I  am  impelled  to  answer 
one  more  objection.  The  Gospel,  it  is  said,  is  a 
great  and  sublime  thing,  and  it  has  certainly  been 
a  saving  power  in  history,  but  it  is  indissolubly 
connected  with  an  antiquated  view  of  the  world 
and  history;  and,  therefore,  although  it  be  painful 
to  say  so,  and  we  have  nothing  better  to  put  in  its 
place,  it  has  lost  its  validity  and  can  have  no 
further  significance  for  us.  In  view  of  this  objec- 
tion there  are  two  things  which  I  should  like  to 
say : — 

Firstly,  no  doubt  it  is  true  that  the  view  of  the 
world  and  history  with  which  the  Gospel  is  con- 
nected is  quite  different  from  ours,  and  that  view 
we  cannot  recall  to  life,  and  would  not  if  we  could ; 
but  **  indissoluble  "  the  connexion  is  not.  I  have 
tried  to  show  what  the  essential  elements  in  the 
Gospel  are,  and  these  elements  are  "  timeless." 
Not  only  are  they  so;  but  the  man  to  whom  the 
Gospel  addresses  itself  is  also  "  timeless,"  that  is  to 
say,  he  is  the  man  who,  in  spite  of  all  progress  and 
development,  never  changes  in  his  inmost  constitu- 
tion and  in  his  fundamental  relations  with  the 
external  world.  Since  that  is  so,  this  Gospel  re- 
mains in  force,  then^  for  us  too. 


The  Gospel  i6i 

Secondly,  the  Gospel  is  based — and  this  is  the 
all-important  element  in  the  view  which  it  takes  of 
the  world  and  history — upon  the  antithesis  between 
Spirit  and  flesh,  God  and  the  world,  good  and  evil. 
Now,  in  spite  of  ardent  efforts,  thinkers  have  not  yet 
succeeded  in  elaborating  on  a  monistic  basis  any 
theory  of  ethics  that  is  satisfactory  and  answers  to 
the  deepest  needs  of  man.  Nor  will  they  succeed. 
In  the  end,  then,  it  is  essentially  a  matter  of  indif- 
ference what  name  we  give  to  the  opposition  with 
which  every  man  of  ethical  feeling  is  concerned: 
God  and  the  world,  the  Here  and  the  Beyond,  the 
visible  and  the  invisible,  matter  and  spirit,  the  life 
of  impulse  and  the  life  of  freedom,  physics  and 
ethics.  That  there  is  a  unity  underlying  this  op- 
position is  a  conviction  which  can  be  gained  by  ex- 
perience; the  one  realm  can  be  subordinated  to  the 
other;  but  it  is  only  by  a  struggle  that  this  unity 
can  be  attained,  and  when  it  is  attained  it  takes 
the  form  of  a  problem  that  is  infinite  and  only  ap- 
proximately soluble.  It  cannot  be  attained  by  any 
refinement  of  a  mechanical  process.  It  is  by  self- 
conquest  that  a  man  is  freed  from  the  tyranny  of 
matter — 

Von  der  Geivalt  die  alle  Wesen  blndet 
Befreit  der  Mensch  sick  der  sick  iiberivindet. 

This  saying  of  Goethe's  excellently  expresses  the 
truth  that  is  here  in  question.     It  is  a  truth  which 


1 62  What  is  Christianity? 

holds  good  for  all  time,  and  it  forms  the  essential 
element  in  the  dramatic  pictures  of  contemporary 
life  in  which  the  Gospel  exhibits  the  antithesis  that 
is  to  be  overcome.  I  do  not  know  how  our  in- 
creased knowledge  of  nature  is  to  hinder  us  from 
bearing  witness  to  the  truth  of  the  creed  that 
"  The  world  passeth  away,  and  the  lust  thereof, 
but  he  that  doeth  the  will  of  God  abideth  forever." 
We  have  to  do  with  a  dualism  which  arose  we 
know  not  how;  but  as  moral  beings  we  are  con- 
vinced that,  as  it  has  been  given  us  in  order  that 
we  may  overcome  it  in  ourselves  and  bring  it  to  a 
unity,  so  also  it  goes  back  to  an  original  unity,  and 
will  at  last  find  its  reconciliation  in  the  great  far- 
off  event,  the  realised  dominion  of  the  Good. 

Dreams,  it  may  be  said ;  for  what  we  see  before 
our  eyes  is  something  very  different.  No!  not 
dreams — after  all  it  is  here  that  our  true  life  has  its 
root — but  patchwork  certainly,  for  we  are  unable  to 
bring  our  knowledge  in  space  and  time,  together 
with  the  contents  of  our  inner  life,  into  the  unity 
of  a  philosophic  theory  of  the  world.  It  is  only  in 
the  peace  of  God  which  passeth  all  understanding 
that  this  unity  dawns  upon  us. 

But  we  have  already  passed  beyond  the  limits  of 
our  immediate  task.  We  proposed  to  acquaint 
ourselves  with  the  Gospel  in  its  fundamental  feat- 
ures and  in  its  most  important  bearings.     I  have 


The  Gospel  i6 


o 


tried  to  respond  to  this  task;  but  the  last  point 
which  we  touched  takes  us  beyond  it.  We  now 
return  to  it,  in  order  to  follow,  in  the  second  part 
of  these  lectures,  the  course  of  the  Christian  re- 
ligion through  history. 


LECTURE   IX 

THE  task  before  us  in  the  second  half  of  these 
lectures  is  to  exhibit  the  history  of  the  Christ- 
ian religion  in  its  leading  phases,  and  to  examine 
its  development  in  the  apostolic  age,  in  Catholic- 
ism, and  in  Protestantism. 

THE   CHRISTIAN  RELIGION   IN  THE  APOSTOLIC 
AGE 

The  inner  circle  of  the  disciples,  the  band  of 
twelve  whom  Jesus  had  gathered  around  him, 
formed  itself  into  a  community.  He  himself 
founded  no  community  in  the  sense  of  an  organised 
union  for  divine  worship — he  was  only  the  teacher 
and  the  disciples  were  the  pupils ;  but  the  fact  that 
the  band  of  pupils  at  once  underwent  this  trans- 
formation became  the  ground  upon  which  all  sub- 
sequent developments  rested.  What  were  the 
characteristic  features  of  this  society  ?  Unless  I 
am  mistaken  there  were  three  factors  at  work  in  it : 
(i.)  The  recognition  of  Jesus  as  the  living  Lord ; 
(ii.)  the  fact  that  in  every  individual  member  of 
the   new  community — including  the  very  slaves — 

164 


The  Apostolic  Age  165 

religion  was  an  actual  experience,  and  involved  the 
consciousness  of  a  living  union  with  God;  (iii.)  the 
leading  of  a  holy  life  in  purity  and  brotherly  fellow- 
ship, and  the  expectation  of  the  Christ's  returri  in 
the  near  future. 

By  keeping  these  three  factors  in  view  we  can 
grasp  the  distinctive  characters  of  the  new  commun- 
ity.    Let  us  look  at  them  more  closely. 

I.  Jesus  Christ  the  Lord. — In  thus  confessing 
their  belief  in  him  his  disciples  took  the  first  step  in 
continuing  their  recognition  of  him  as  the  author- 
itative teacher,  of  his  word  as  their  permanent 
standard  of  life,  of  their  desire  to  keep  **  everything 
that  he  commanded  them."  But  this  does  not  ex- 
press the  full  meaning  attaching  to  the  words  "  the 
Lord  ";  nay,  it  is  far  from  touching  their  peculiar 
significance.  The  primitive  community  called  Jesus 
its  Lord  because  he  had  sacrificed  his  life  for  it, 
and  because  its  members  were  convinced  that  he 
had  been  raised  from  the  dead  and  was  then  sitting 
on  the  right  hand  of  God.  There  is  no  historical 
fact  more  certain  than  that  the  apostle  Paul  was 
not,  as  we  might  perhaps  expect,  the  first  to  em- 
phasise so  prominently  the  significance  of  Christ's 
death  and  resurrection,  but  that  in  recognising 
their  meaning  he  stood  exactly  on  the  same  ground 
as  the  primitive  community.  **  I  delivered  unto 
you  first  of  all,"  he  wrote  to  the  Corinthians,  ''that 


1 66  What  is  Christianity? 

which  I  also  received,  how  that  Christ  died  for  our 
sins  according  to  the  Scriptures,  and  that  he  was 
buried,  and  that  he  rose  again  the  third  day." 
Paul  did,  it  is  true,  make  Christ's  death  and  resur- 
rection the  subject  of  a  particular  speculative  idea, 
and,  so  to  speak,  reduced  the  whole  of  the  Gospel 
to  these  events ;  but  they  were  already  accepted  as 
fundamental  facts  by  the  circle  of  Jesus*  personal 
disciples  and  by  the  primitive  community.  In  these 
two  facts  it  may  be  said  that  the  permanent  re- 
cognition of  Jesus  Christ,  and  the  reverence  and 
adoration  which  he  received,  obtained  their  first 
hold.  They  formed  the  ground  on  which  the  whole 
Christ ological  theory  rested.  But  within  two  gen- 
erations from  his  death  Jesus  Christ  was  already 
put  upon  the  highest  plane  upon  which  men  can 
put  him.  As  men  were  conscious  of  him  as  the 
living  Lord,  he  was  glorified  as  the  one  who  had 
been  raised  to  the  right  hand  of  God  and  had  van- 
quished death ;  as  the  Prince  of  Life,  as  the  strength 
of  a  new  existence,  as  the  way,  the  truth,  and  the 
life.  The  Messianic  ideas  permitted  of  his  being 
placed  upon  God's  throne,  without  endangering 
monotheism.  But,  above  all,  he  was  felt  to  be  the 
active  principle  of  individual  life:  "  It  is  not  I  that 
live,  but  Christ  that  liveth  in  me";  he  is  "my" 
life,  and  to  press  onwards  to  him  through  death  is 
great  gain.     Where  can  we  find  in  the  history  of 


The  Expiatory  Sacrifice  167 

mankind  any  similar  instance  of  men  eating  and 
drinking  with  their  master,  seeing  him  in  the  char- 
acteristic aspects  of  his  humanity,  and  then  pro- 
claiming him  not  only  as  the  great  prophet  and 
revealer  of  God,  but  as  the  divine  disposer  of  his- 
tory, as  the  "  beginning"  of  God's  creation,  and 
as  the  inner  strength  of  a  new  life  !  It  was  not  thus 
that  Mohammed's  disciples  spoke  of  their  prophet. 
Neither  is  it  sufficient  to  assert  that  the  Messianic 
predicates  were  simply  transferred  to  Jesus,  and 
that  everything  may  be  explained  by  Jesus'  ex- 
pected return  in  glory  throwing  its  radiance  back- 
wards. True,  in  the  certain  hope  of  Jesus'  return, 
his  "coming  in  lowliness"  was  overlooked;  but 
that  it  was  possible  to  conceive  this  certain  hope 
and  hold  it  fast ;  that  in  spite  of  suffering  and  death 
it  was  possible  to  see  in  him  the  promised  Messiah ; 
and  that  in  and  side  by  side  with  the  vulgar  Mes- 
sianic image  of  him,  men  felt  and  opened  their 
hearts  to  him  as  the  present  Lord  and  Saviour, — 
that  is  what  is  so  astonishing!  It  was  just  the 
death  "  for  our  sins,"  and  the  resurrection,  which 
confirmed  the  impression  given  by  his  person,  and 
provided  faith  with  a  sure  hold :  he  died  as  a  sacri- 
fice for  us,  and  he  now  lives. 

There  are  many  to-day  who  have  come  to  regard 
both  these  positions  as  very  strange;  and  their  atti- 
tude towards  them  is  one  of  indifference — towards 


1 68  What  IS  Christianity? 

the  death,  on  the  ground  that  no  such  significance 
can  be  attributed  to  a  single  event  of  this  kind; 
towards  the  resurrection,  because  what  is  here 
affirmed  to  have  happened  is  incredible. 

It  is  not  our  business  to  defend  either  the  view 
which  was  taken  of  the  death,  or  the  idea  that  he 
had  risen  again;  but  it  is  certainly  the  historian's 
duty  to  make  himself  so  fully  acquainted  with  both 
positions  as  to  be  sensible  of  the  significance  which 
they  possessed  and  still  possess.  That  these  posi- 
tions were  of  capital  importance  for  the  primitive 
community  has  never  been  doubted ;  even  Strauss 
did  not  dispute  it ;  and  the  great  critic,  Ferdinand 
Christian  Baur,  acknowledged  that  it  was  on  the 
belief  in  them  that  the  earliest  Christian  communion 
was  built  up.  It  must  be  possible,  then,  for  us  in 
our  turn  to  get  a  feeling  and  an  understanding  for 
what  they  were ;  nay,  perhaps  we  may  do  more ;  if 
we  probe  the  history  of  religion  to  the  bottom,  we 
shall  find  the  truth  and  justice  of  ideas  which  on 
the  surface  seem  so  paradoxical  and  incredible  lying 
at  the  very  roots  of  the  faith. 

Let  us  first  consider  the  idea  that  Jesus*  death 
on  the  cross  was  one  of  expiation.  Now,  if  we 
were  to  consider  the  conception  attaching  to  the 
words  **  expiatory  death  "  in  the  alien  realm  of 
formal  speculation,  we  should,  it  is  true,  soon  find 


The  Expiatory  Sacrifice  169 

ourselves  in  a  blind  alley,  and  every  chance  of  our 
understanding  the  idea  would  vanish.  We  should 
be  absolutely  at  the  end  of  our  tether  if  we  were  to 
indulge  in  speculations  as  to  the  necessity  which 
can  have  compelled  God  to  require  such  a  sacrificial 
death.  Let  us,  in  the  first  place,  bear  in  mind  a 
fact  in  the  history  of  religion  which  is  quite  univer- 
sal. Those  who  looked  upon  this  death  as  a  sacri- 
fice soon  ceased  to  offer  God  any  blood-sacrifice  at 
all.  The  value  attaching  to  such  sacrifices  had,  it 
is  true,  been  in  doubt  for  generations,  and  had  been 
steadily  diminishing;  but  it  was  only  now  that  the 
sacrifices  disappeared  altogether.  They  did  not 
disappear  immediately  or  at  one  stroke, — this  is  a 
point  with  which  we  need  not  concern  ourselves 
here, — but  their  disappearance  took  place  within  a 
very  brief  period  and  was  not  delayed  until  after 
the  destruction  of  the  temple.  Further,  wherever 
the  Christian  message  subsequently  penetrated,  the 
sacrificial  altars  were  deserted  and  dealers  in  sacri- 
ficial beasts  found  no  more  purchasers.  If  there  is 
one  thing  that  is  certain  in  the  history  of  religion, 
it  is  that  the  death  of  Christ  put  an  end  to  all  blood- 
sacrifices.  But  that  they  are  based  on  a  deep  re- 
ligious idea  is  proved  by  the  extent  to  which  they 
existed  among  so  many  nations,  and  they  are  not 
to  be  judged  from  the  point  of  view  of  cold  and 
blind  rationalism,  but  from  that  of  vivid  emotion. 


1 70  What  is  Christianity  ? 

If  it  is  obvious  that  they  respond  to  a  religious  need  ; 
if,  further,  it  is  certain  that  the  instinct  which  led 
to  them  found  its  satisfaction  and  therefore  its  goal 
in  Christ's  death ;  if,  lastly,  there  was  the  express 
declaration,  as  we  read  in  the  Epistle  to  the  He- 
brews, that  **  by  one  offering  he  hath  perfected  for 
ever  them  that  are  sanctified,"  we  can  no  longer 
feel  this  idea  of  Christ's  sacrifice  to  be  so  very 
strange ;  for  history  has  decided  in  its  favour,  and 
we  are  beginning  to  get  in  touch  with  it.  His 
death  had  the  value  of  an  expiatory  sacrifice,  for 
otherwise  it  would  not  have  had  strength  to  pene- 
trate into  that  inner  world  in  which  the  blood-sacri- 
fices originated ;  but  it  was  not  a  sacrifice  in  the 
same  sense  as  the  others,  or  else  it  could  not  have 
put  an  end  to  them ;  it  suppressed  them  by  settling 
accounts  with  them.  Nay,  we  may  go  further;  the 
validity  of  all  material  sacrifices  was  destroyed  by 
Christ's  death.  Wherever  individual  Christians  or 
whole  churches  have  returned  to  them,  it  has  been 
a  relapse:  the  earliest  Christians  knew  that  the 
whole  sacrificial  system  was  thenceforth  abolished, 
and  if  they  asked  for  a  reason,  they  pointed  to 
Christ's  death. 

In  the  second  place :  any  one  who  will  look  into 
history  will  find  that  the  sufferings  of  the  pure  and 
the  just  are  its  saving  element ;  that  is  to  say,  that  it 
is  not  words,  but  deeds,  and  not  deeds  only  but  self- 


The  Expiatory  Sacrifice  171 

sacrificing  deeds,  and  not  only  self-sacrificing  deeds, 
but  the  surrender  of  life  itself,  that  forms  the  turn- 
ing-point in  every  great  advance  in  history.  In  this 
sense  I  believe  that,  however  far  we  may  stand 
from  any  theories  about  vicarious  sacrifice,  there  are 
few  of  us  after  all  who  will  mistake  the  truth  and 
inner  justice  of  such  a  description  as  we  read  in 
Isaiah  liii.  :  **  Surely  he  hath  borne  our  griefs  and 
carried  our  sorrows."  **  Greater  love  hath  no  man 
than  this,  that  a  man  lay  down  his  life  for  his 
friends  " — it  is  in  this  light  that  Jesus'  death  was 
regarded  from  the  beginning.  Wherever  any  great 
deed  has  been  accomplished  in  history,  the  finer  a 
man's  moral  feelings  are,  the  more  sensible  will  he 
be  of  vicarious  suffering;  the  more  he  will  bring 
that  suffering  into  relation  to  himself.  Did  Luther 
in  the  monastery  strive  only  for  himself  ? — was  it 
not  for  us  all  that  he  inwardly  bled  when  he  fought 
with  the  religion  that  was  handed  down  to  him  ? 
But  it  was  by  the  cross  of  Jesus  Christ  that  man- 
kind gained  such  an  experience  of  the  power  of 
purity  and  love  true  to  death  that  they  can  never 
forget  it,  and  that  it  signifies  a  new  epoch  in  their 
history. 

Finally,  in  the  third  place:  no  reflection  of  the 
"  reason,"  no  deliberation  of  the  '*  intelligence," 
will  ever  be  able  to  expunge  from  the  moral  ideas 
of  mankind    the  conviction  that  injustice  and  sin 


172  What  is  Christianity? 

deserve  to  be  punished,  and  that  everywhere  that 
the  just  man  suffers,  an  atonement  is  made  which 
puts  us  to  shame  and  purifies  us.  It  is  a  conviction 
which  is  impenetrable,  for  it  comes  out  of  those 
depths  in  which  we  feel  ourselves  to  be  a  unity,  and 
out  of  the  world  which  lies  behind  the  world  of 
phenomena.  Mocked  and  denied  as  though  it  had 
long  perished,  this  truth  is  indestructibly  preserved 
in  the  moral  experience  of  mankind.  These  are  the 
ideas  which  from  the  beginning  onwards  have  been 
roused  by  Christ's  death,  and  have,  as  it  were, 
played  around  it.  Other  ideas  have  been  disen- 
gaged,— ideas  of  less  importance  but,  nevertheless, 
very  efficacious  at  times, — but  these  are  the  most 
powerful.  They  have  taken  shape  in  the  firm  con- 
viction that  by  his  death  in  suffering  he  did  a 
definitive  work;  that  he  did  it  *'  for  us."  Were  we 
to  attempt  to  measure  and  register  what  he  did,  as 
was  soon  attempted,  we  should  fall  into  dreadful 
paradoxes;  but  we  can  in  our  turn  feel  it  for  our- 
selves with  the  same  freedom  with  which  it  was 
originally  felt.  If  we  also  consider  that  Jesus  him- 
self described  his  death  as  a  service  which  he  was 
rendering  to  many,  and  that  by  a  solemn  act  he  in- 
stituted a  lasting  remembrance  of  it  —  I  see  no 
reason  to  doubt  the  fact — we  can  understand  how 
this  death  and  the  shame  of  the  cross  were  bound 
to  take  the  central  place. 


The  Resurrection  173 

Jesus,  however,  was  proclaimed  as  "  the  Lord  " 
not  only  because  he  had  died  for  sinners  but  be- 
cause he  was  the  risen  and  the  living  one.  If  the 
resurrection  meant  nothing  but  that  a  deceased 
body  of  flesh  and  blood  came  to  life  again,  we 
should  make  short  work  of  this  tradition.  But  it  is 
not  so.  The  New  Testament  itself  distinguishes 
between  the  Easter  message  of  the  empty  grave 
and  the  appearances  of  Jesus  on  the  one  side,  and 
the  Easter  faith  on  the  other.  Although  the  great- 
est value  is  attached  to  that  message,  we  are  to 
hold  the  Easter  faith  even  in  its  absence.  The 
story  of  Thomas  is  told  for  the  exclusive  purpose  of 
impressing  upon  us  that  we  must  hold  the  Easter 
faith  even  without  the  Easter  message:  **  Blessed 
are  they  that  have  not  seen  and  yet  have  believed." 
The  disciples  on  the  road  to  Emmaus  were  blamed 
for  not  believing  in  the  resurrection  even  though 
the  Easter  message  had  not  yet  reached  them. 
The  Lord  is  a  Spirit,  says  Paul;  and  this  carries 
with  it  the  certainty  of  his  resurrection.  The  Easter 
message  tells  us  of  that  wonderful  event  in  Joseph 
of  Arimathaea's  garden,  which,  however,  no  eye 
saw ;  it  tells  us  of  the  empty  grave  into  which  a  few 
women  and  disciples  looked ;  of  the  appearance  of 
the  Lord  in  a  transfigured  form — so  glorified  that 
his  own  could  not  immediately  recognise  him;  it 
soon  begins  to  tell  us,  too,  of  what  the  risen  one 


1 74  What  is  Christianity  ? 

said  and  did.  The  reports  became  more  and  more 
complete,  and  more  and  more  confident.  But  the 
Easter /^^V^  is  the  conviction  that  the  crucified  one 
gained  a  victory  over  death;  that  God  is  just  and 
powerful ;  that  he  who  is  the  firstborn  among  many 
brethren  still  lives.  Paul  based  his  Easter  faith 
upon  the  certainty  that  "  the  second  Adam  "  was 
from  heaven,  and  upon  his  experience,  on  the  way 
to  Damascus,  of  God  revealing  His  Son  to  him  as 
still  alive.  God,  he  said,  revealed  him  **  in  me  "  ; 
but  this  inner  revelation  was  coupled  with  ''  a 
vision  "  overwhelming  as  vision  never  was  after- 
wards. Did  the  apostle  know  of  the  message  about 
the  empty  grave  ?  While  there  are  theologians  of 
note  who  doubt  it,  I  think  it  probable ;  but  we  can- 
not be  quite  certain  about  it.  Certain  it  is  that 
what  he  and  the  disciples  regarded  as  all-important 
was  not  the  state  in  which  the  grave  was  found,  but 
Christ's  appearances.  But  who  of  us  can  maintain 
that  a  clear  account  of  these  appearances  can  be 
constructed  out  of  the  stories  told  by  Paul  and  the 
evangelists ;  and  if  that  be  impossible,  and  there  is 
no  tradition  of  single  events  which  is  quite  trust- 
worthy, how  is  the  Easter  faith  to  be  based  on 
them  ?  Either  we  must  decide  to  rest  our  belief 
on  a  foundation  unstable  and  always  exposed  to 
fresh  doubts,  or  else  we  must  abandon  this  founda- 
tion altogether,  and  with  it  the  miraculous  appeal 


The  Resurrection  175 

to  our  senses.  But  here,  too,  the  images  of  the 
faith  have  their  roots  in  truth  and  reahty.  What- 
ever may  have  happened  at  the  grave  and  in  the 
matter  of  the  appearances,  one  thing  is  certain : 
TJiis  grave  was  the  birthplace  of  tJie  indestructible  be- 
lief that  death  is  vanquished^  and  there  is  a  life 
eternal.  It  is  useless  to  cite  Plato ;  it  is  useless  to 
point  to  the  Persian  religion,  and  the  ideas  and  the 
literature  of  later  Judaism.  All  that  would  have 
perished  and  has  perished;  but  the  certainty  of  the 
resurrection  and  of  a  life  eternal  which  is  bound  up 
with  the  grave  in  Joseph's  garden  has  not  perished, 
and  on  the  conviction  that  Jesus  lives  we  still  base 
those  hopes  of  citizenship  in  an  Eternal  City  which 
make  our  earthly  life  worth  living  and  tolerable. 
"  He  delivered  them  who  through  fear  of  death 
were  all  their  lifetime  subject  to  bondage,"  as  the 
writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  confesses. 
That  is  the  point.  And  although  there  be  excep- 
tions to  its  sway,  wherever,  despite  all  the  weight 
of  nature,  there  is  a  strong  faith  in  the  infinite  value 
of  the  soul;  wherever  death  has  lost  its  terrors; 
wherever  the  sufferings  of  the  present  are  measured 
against  a  future  of  glory,  this  feeling  of  life  is  bound 
up  with  the  conviction  that  Jesus  Christ  has  passed 
through  death,  that  God  has  awakened  him  and 
raised  him  to  life  and  glory.  What  else  can  we  be- 
lieve but  that  the  earliest  disciples  also  found  the 


1 76  What  is  Christianity  ? 

ultimate  foundation  of  their  faith  in  the  living  Lord 
to  be  the  strength  which  had  gone  out  from  him  ? 
It  was  a  life  never  to  be  destroyed  which  they  felt 
to  be  going  out  from  him ;  only  for  a  brief  span  of 
time  could  his  death  stagger  them;  the  strength  of 
the  Lord  prevailed  over  everything;  God  did  not 
give  him  over  to  death ;  he  lives  as  the  first-fruits 
of  those  who  have  fallen  asleep.  It  is  not  by  any 
speculative  ideas  of  philosophy  but  by  the  vision  of 
Jesus'  life  and  death  and  by  the  feeling  of  his  im- 
perishable union  with  God  that  mankind,  so  far  as 
it  believes  in  these  things,  has  attained  to  that  cer- 
tainty of  eternal  life  for  which  it  was  meant,  and 
which  it  dimly  discerns — eternal  life  in  time  and 
beyond  time.  This  feeling  first  established  faith  in 
the  value  of  personal  life.  But  of  every  attempt  to 
demonstrate  the  certainty  of  "  immortality  "  by 
logical  process,  we  may  say  in  the  words  of  the 
poet: 

Believe  and  venture  :  as  for  pledges, 
The  gods  give  none. 

Belief  in  the  living  Lord  and  in  a  life  eternal  is  the 
act  of  the  freedom  which  is  born  of  God. 

As  the  crucified  and  risen  one  Jesus  was  the 
Lord.  While  this  confession  of  belief  in  him  ex- 
pressed a  man's  whole  relation  to  him,  it  also  af- 
forded endless  matter  for  thought  and  speculation. 
This  conception  of  the  "  Lord  "  came  to  embrace 


The  Holy  Ghost  177 

the  many-sided  image  of  the  Messiah  and  all  the 
Old  Testament  prophecies  of  a  similar  kind.  But 
as  yet  no  ecclesiastical  "  doctrines  "  about  him  had 
been  elaborated ;  everyone  who  acknowledged  him 
as  the  Lord  belonged  to  the  community. 

2.  Religion  as  an  actual  experience. — The  second 
characteristic  feature  of  the  primitive  community  is 
that  every  individual  in  it,  even  the  very  slaves, 
possess  a  living  experience  of  God.  This  is  suffi- 
ciently remarkable;  for  at  first  sight  we  might 
think  that  all  this  devotion  to  Christ,  and  this  un- 
conditional reverence  for  him,  must  necessarily  have 
resulted  in  all  religion  becoming  a  punctilious  sub- 
jection to  his  words,  and  so  a  kind  of  voluntary 
servitude.  But  the  Pauline  epistles  and  the  Acts 
of  the  Apostles  give  us  quite  a  difTerent  picture. 
While  they  do,  indeed,  attest  the  fact  that  Jesus' 
words  were  held  in  unqualified  reverence,  this  fact 
is  not  the  most  prominent  feature  in  the  picture  of 
earliest  Christendom.  What  is  much  more  charac- 
teristic is  that  individual  Christians,  moved  by  the 
Spirit  of  God,  are  placed  in  a  living  and  entirely 
personal  relation  to  God  Himself.  Dr.  Weinel  has 
lately  presented  us  with  a  fine  work  on  the  Work- 
ings of  the  Spirit  and  the  Spirits  in  the  Post-Apostolic 
Age.  It  contains  many  passages  which  take  us  back 
to  the  apostolic  age  and  treat  in  greater  detail  of 


1 7^  What  is  Christianity  ? 

the  matters  which  Professor  Gunkel  has  so  impress- 
ively placed  before  us  in  his  treatise  on  Tke  Holy 
Ghost.  The  neglected  problems  of  the  extent  to 
which,  and  the  forms  in  which,  the  Spirit  exercised 
an  influence  on  the  life  of  the  early  Christians,  and 
of  the  view  to  be  taken  of  the  phenomena  connected 
with  this  influence,  are  admirably  discussed  by  Dr. 
Weinel.  In  substance,  his  conclusion  is  that  the 
expressions  **  receiving  "  and  "  acting  by**  the  Holy 
Ghost  signify  such  an  independence  and  immediacy 
of  religious  life  and  feeling,  and  such  an  inner  union 
with  God,  perceived  to  be  the  mightiest  reality,  as 
could  not  have  been  expected  from  strict  subjection 
to  Jesus'  authority.  To  be  the  child  of  God  and  to 
be  gifted  with  the  Spirit  are  simply  the  same  as 
being  a  disciple  of  Christ.  That  a  man  is  not  truly 
a  disciple  unless  he  is  pervaded  by  God's  Spirit  is 
a  point  which  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  fully 
recognises.  The  pouring  out  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
placed  in  the  forefront  of  the  narrative.  The  au- 
thor is  conscious  that  the  Christian  religion  would 
not  be  the  highest  and  the  ultimate  religion  unless 
it  brought  every  individual  into  an  immediate  and 
living  connexion  with  God.  This  mutual  union  of 
a  full,  obedient  subjection  to  the  Lord  with  freedom 
in  the  Spirit  is  the  most  important  feature  in  the 
distinctive  character  of  this  religion,  and  the  seal  of 
its  greatness.     The   workings   of   the    Spirit   were 


The  Holy  Ghost  179 

shown  everywhere,  in  the  entire  domain  of  the  five 
senses,  in  the  sphere  of  will  and  action,  in  profound 
philosophical  speculation,  and  in  the  most  delicate 
appreciation  of  the  facts  of  the  moral  life.  The 
elementary  forces  of  the  religious  temperament, 
long  held  in  check  by  systems  of  doctrine  and  the 
ceremonies  of  public  worship,  were  again  set  free. 
They  showed  themselves  in  ecstatic  phenomena,  in 
signs  and  wonders,  in  an  enhancement  of  all  the 
functions  of  life,  down  to  conditions  of  a  pathologi- 
cal and  suspicious  character.  The  fact,  however, 
was  not  forgotten, — and  where  it  threatened  to  be 
obscured  it  was  strongly  impressed  on  people's  at- 
tention,— that  those  strange  and  violent  phenomena 
were  individual,  but  that  side  by  side  with  them 
there  are  workings  of  the  Spirit  which  are  bestowed 
upon  everyone  and  with  which  no  one  can  dispense. 
But  **  The  fruit  of  the  Spirit,"  as  the  apostle  Paul 
writes,  **  is  love,  joy,  peace,  long-suffering,  gentle- 
ness, goodness,  faith,  meekness,  temperance."  The 
other  feature  in  the  distinctive  character  and  great- 
ness of  this  religion  is  that  it  does  not  overestimate 
the  elementary  strength  which  gave  it  birth ;  that 
it  makes  its  spiritual  purport  and  its  discipline 
triumph  over  all  states  of  ecstasy ;  and  that  it  holds 
immovably  to  its  conviction  that  the  Spirit  of 
God,  however  it  may  reveal  itself,  is  a  Spirit  of 
holiness  and  of  love.     But  here  we  have  already 


i8o  What  is  Christianity? 

passed  to  the  third  feature  which  characterises  early 
Christendom. 

3.  The  third  feature  is  the  leading  of  a  holy  life 
in  purity  and  brotherly  fellowship  and  in  the  ex- 
pectation of  Christ's  speedy  return.  The  course 
which  the  history  of  the  Church  followed  resulted 
in  the  dogmatic  details  in  the  New  Testament 
being  selected  for  investigation,  rather  than  those 
parts  of  it  which  depicted  the  life  of  the  first 
Christians  and  exhorted  men  to  morality.  And 
yet  not  only  are  the  New  Testament  epistles  largely 
taken  up  with  these  moral  exhortations,  but  not  a 
few  of  the  so-called  dogmatic  portions  were  also 
written  solely  for  moral  admonition.  Jesus  directed 
his  disciples  to  give  these  exhortations  the  first 
place,  and  the  earliest  Christians  were  well  aware 
that  the  first  business  of  life  was  to  do  the  will  of 
God  and  present  themselves  as  a  holy  community. 
Upon  this  their  whole  existence  and  their  mission 
in  the  world  were  based.  There  were  two  points 
which,  in  accordance  with  Jesus'  teaching,  they  put 
first  and  foremost,  and  they  were  points  which  at 
bottom  embraced  the  whole  range  of  moral  action : 
purity  and  brotherly  fellowsJiip.  They  took  purity 
in  the  deepest  and  most  comprehensive  sense  of  the 
word,  as  the  horror  of  everything  that  is  unholy, 
and  as  the  inner  pleasure  in  everything  that  is  up- 


The  Community  of  Brothers      i8i 

right  and  true,  lovely  and  of  good  report.  They 
also  meant  purity  in  regard  to  the  body:  "  Know 
ye  not  that  your  body  is  the  temple  of  the  Holy 
Ghost  which  is  in  you  ?  therefore  glorify  God  in 
your  body."  In  this  sublime  consciousness  the 
earliest  Christians  took  up  the  struggle  against  the 
sins  of  impurity,  which  in  the  heathen  world  were 
not  accounted  sins  at  all.  As  sons  of  God,  "  blame- 
less and  harmless  in  the  midst  of  a  crooked  and 
perverse  nation,"  they  were  to  "shine  as  lights  in 
the  world."  It  was  thus  that  they  were  to  show  of 
what  they  were  made,  and  it  was  thus  that  they 
showed  it :  to  be  holy  as  God  was  holy,  to  be  pure 
as  disciples  of  Christ.  Here,  too,  we  get  the  meas- 
ure of  the  renunciation  of  the  world  which  this 
community  imposed  upon  itself.  **  To  keep  one- 
self unspotted  from  the  world  "  was  the  asceticism 
which  it  practised  itself  and  required  of  its  adher- 
ents. The  other  point  is  brotherly  fellowship.  In 
joining  the  love  of  God  with  the  love  of  neighbour 
in  his  sayings,  Jesus  himself  had  a  new  union  of 
men  with  one  another  in  view.  The  earliest  Christ- 
ians understood  him.  From  the  very  first  they 
constituted  themselves  into  a  brotherly  union,  not 
in  word  only  but  in  deed — a  living  realisation  of 
what  he  meant.  In  calling  themselves  "  brothers," 
they  felt  all  the  obligations  which  the  name  imposes 
and    tried    to    come    up    to   them,    not    by    legal 


1 82  What  is  Christianity? 

regulations  but  by  voluntary  service,  each  according 
to  the  measure  of  his  own  powers  and  gifts.  The 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  tell  us  that  in  Jerusalem  they 
went  so  far  as  to  have  a  voluntary  community  of 
goods.  Paul  says  nothing  about  it ;  and  if  we  are 
to  accept  this  obscure  report  as  really  trustworthy, 
then  neither  Paul  nor  the  Christian  communities 
among  the  Gentiles  took  pattern  by  the  enterprise. 
They  seem  not  to  have  been  required,  nor  to  have 
thought  it  desirable,  to  order  their  lives  afresh  in 
externals.  The  brotherly  fellowship  which  "  the 
holy  "  were  to  cultivate,  and  did  cultivate,  was  dis- 
tinguished by  two  principles:  "  Whether  one  mem- 
ber suffer,  all  the  members  suffer  with  it,"  and 
"  Bear  ye  one  another's  burdens  and  so  fulfil  the 
law  of  Christ." 


LECTURE    X 

IT  was  as  their  Lord  that  the  primitive  community 
of  Christians  believed  in  Jesus.  They  thus  ex- 
pressed their  absolute  devotion  to,  and  confidence 
in,  him  as  the  Prince  of  Life.  As  every  individual 
Christian  stood  in  an  immediate  relation  to  God 
through  the  Spirit,  priests  and  mediations  were  no 
longer  wanted.  Finally,  these  "  holy  "  people 
were  drawn  together  into  societies,  which  bound 
themselves  to  a  strictly  moral  life  in  purity  and 
brotherly  fellowship.  On  the  last  point  let  me  add 
a  few  words. 

It  is  a  proof  of  the  inwardness  and  moral  power 
of  the  new  message  that,  in  spite  of  the  enthus- 
iasm arising  from  personal  experience  of  religion, 
there  were  relatively  seldom  any  extravagant 
outbursts  and  violent  movements  to  be  combated. 
Such  movements  may  have  been  more  frequent 
than  the  direct  declarations  of  our  authorities 
allow  us  to  suppose,  but  they  did  not  form  the 
rule;  and  when  they  arose  Paul  was  certainly  not 
the  only  one  who  was  concerned  to  put  them  down. 
He  had  certainly  no  wish  to  quench  the  "  Spirit," 

1S3 


184  What  is  Christianity? 

but  when  enthusiasm  threatened  to  lead  to  a  re- 
pugnance to  work,  as  in  Thessalonica,  or  when,  as 
in  Corinth,  there  was  a  superabundance  of  ecstatic 
talk,  he  uttered  some  sober  warnings:  "  If  any 
would  not  work,  neither  should  he  eat,"  and  "  I 
had  rather  speak  five  words  with  my  understand- 
ing, that  by  my  voice  I  might  teach  others  also, 
than  ten  thousand  words  in  an  unknown  tongue." 
Still  more  plainly  are  the  concentrated  repose  and 
power  of  the  leaders  shown  in  the  moral  admoni- 
tions, such  as  we  get  not  only  in  the  Pauline 
epistles  but  also,  for  example,  in  the  First  Epistle  of 
Peter  and  in  the  general  Epistle  of  James.  Christian 
character  is  to  show  itself  in  the  essential  circum- 
stances of  human  life,  and  that  life  is  to  be  invigor- 
ated, supported,  and  illumined  by  the  Spirit.  In 
the  relation  of  husband  to  wife  and  of  wife  to  hus- 
band, of  parents  to  children,  of  masters  to  servants; 
further,  in  the  individual's  relation  to  constituted 
authority,  to  the  surrounding  heathen  world,  and, 
again,  to  the  widow  and  the  orphan,  is  "  the  service 
of  God  "  to  be  proved  and  tested.  Where  have  we 
another  example  in  history  of  a  religion  intervening 
with  such  a  robust  supernatural  consciousness,  and 
at  the  same  time  laying  the  moral  foundations  of 
the  earthly  life  of  the  community  so  firmly  as  this 
message  ?  If  a  man  fails  to  be  inwardly  affected  by 
the  faith  proclaimed  by  the  New  Testament  writers. 


The  Community  of  Brothers       185 

he  must  certainly  be  stirred  to  the  depths  by  the 
purity,  the  wealth,  the  power,  and  the  delicacy  of 
the  moral  knowledge  which  invests  their  exhorta- 
tions with  such  incomparable  value. 

There  is  another  feature  of  the  life  of  the  earliest 
Christians  which  also  deserves  notice  in  this  con- 
nexion. They  lived  in  the  expectation  of  Christ's 
near  return.  This  hope  supplied  them  with  an 
extraordinarily  strong  motive  for  disregarding 
earthly  things,  and  the  joys  and  sufferings  of  this 
world.  That  they  were  mistaken  in  their  expecta- 
tion we  must  freely  grant ;  but  nevertheless  it  was 
a  highly  efificacious  lever  for  raising  them  above  the 
world,  and  teaching  them  to  make  little  of  small 
things  and  much  of  great  things,  and  to  distinguish 
between  what  is  of  time  and  what  is  of  eternity. 
For  a  new  and  powerful  religious  impulse,  which 
effects  its  own  influence,  to  be  associated  with 
another  factor  which  enhances  and  strengthens  that 
influence,  is  what  we  see  constantly  happening  in 
the  history  of  religion.  With  every  renewal  of  the 
religious  experience  of  sin  and  grace  since  August- 
ine's day,  what  a  lever  has  been  supplied  by  the 
idea  of  predestination^  and  yet  it  is  an  idea  which  is 
in  no  way  derived  from  that  experience  itself. 
How  much  enthusiasm  was  inspired  in  Cromwell's 
troops,  and  how  greatly  were  the  Puritans  on  both 
sides  of  the  ocean  strengthened  by  the  cojisciotisness 


1 86  What  is  Christianity? 

of  adoption,  although  this  consciousness,  too,  was 
only  an  adjunct.  When  the  reh'gious  experiences 
of  St.  Francis  developed  in  the  Middle  Ages  into  a 
new  form  of  devotion,  how  much  assistance  it  re- 
ceived from  the  doctrine  of  poverty,  and  yet  this 
doctrine  was  an  independent  force.  The  conviction 
which  obtained  in  the  apostolic  age  that  the  Lord 
had  really  appeared  after  his  death  on  the  cross 
may  also  be  regarded  in  the  same  light.  What  we 
are  thus  taught  is  that  the  most  inward  of  all  pos- 
sessions, namely,  religion,  does  not  struggle  up 
into  life  free  and  isolated,  but  grows,  so  to  speak, 
in  coverings  of  bark  and  cannot  grow  without 
them.  In  studying  the  apostolic  age,  however,  it 
is  important  to  observe  that,  not  only  in  spite  of  the 
religious  enthusiasm  but  even  in  spite  of  the  intense 
eschatological  hopes  which  prevailed,  the  task  of 
making  earthly  life  holy  was  not  neglected. 

The  three  principles  which  we  have  emphasised 
as  contributing  most  to  the  characteristic  features 
of  primitive  Christianity  could  also,  if  necessary, 
have  been  brought  to  bear  within  the  framework  of 
Judaism  and  in  connexion  with  the  synagogue. 
There,  too,  Jesus  could  have  been  acknowledged 
as  the  Lord,  the  new  experience  united  with  the 
ancestral  religion,  and  the  society  of  brothers  de- 
veloped in  the  form  of  a  Jewish  conventicle.     In 


Christ's  Return  187 

Palestine,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  this  was  the  form 
which  the  earliest  communities  took.  But  the  new 
principles  displayed  great  vigour  and  pointed  far 
beyond  Judaism :  Jesus  Christ  the  Lord  is  not  only 
Israel's  Lord,  but  the  Lord  of  history,  the  Lord  of 
all  men.  The  new  experience  of  a  direct  union 
with  God  makes  the  old  worship  with  its  priests  and 
mediations  unnecessary.  The  society  of  brothers 
towers  over  all  other  associations,  and  deprives 
them  of  any  value.  The  inner  development  which 
the  new  tendency  virtually  comprised  began  at  once : 
Paul  was  not  the  first  to  start  it ;  before  and  side  by 
side  with  him  there  were  obscure  and  nameless 
Christians  in  the  Dispersion  who  took  up  Gentiles 
into  the  new  society.  They  did  away  with  the 
particularistic  and  statutory  regulations  of  the  law 
by  declaring  that  they  were  to  be  understood  in  a 
purely  spiritual  sense  and  to  be  interpreted  as 
symbols.  There  was  a  branch  of  the  Jewish  world 
outside  Palestine  where  this  declaration  had  long 
taken  actual  effect — it  is  true,  on  other  grounds — 
and  where  the  Jewish  religion  was  being  freed  from 
its  limitations  by  a  process  of  philosophical  inter- 
pretation which  was  bringing  it  to  the  level  of  a 
spiritual  religion  for  the  whole  world.  This  de- 
velopment may  be  regarded  in  the  light  of  a  pre- 
liminary stage  in  the  history  of  Christianity,  and  was 
in  many  respects  really  so.     It  was  the  stage  on 


1 88  What  is  Christianity  ? 

which  those  nameless  Christians  entered.  It  was 
the  path  upon  which  a  deliverance  from  historical 
Judaism  and  its  outworn  religious  ordinances  was 
capable  of  gradual  attainment.  But  one  thing  is 
certain :  it  was  not  the  goal  of  the  movement.  So 
long  as  the  words  "  the  former  religion  is  done 
away  with  "  remained  unspoken,  there  was  always  a 
fear  that  in  the  next  generation  the  old  precepts 
would  be  brought  forward  again  in  their  literal 
meaning.  How  often  and  often  in  the  history  of 
religion  has  there  been  a  tendency  to  do  away  with 
some  traditional  form  of  doctrine  or  ritual  which  has 
ceased  to  satisfy  inwardly,  but  to  do  away  with  it 
by  giving  it  a  new  interpretation.  The  endeavour 
seems  to  be  succeeding;  the  temper  and  the  know- 
ledge prevailing  at  the  moment  are  favourable  to  it 
—  when,  lo  and  behold!  the  old  meaning  suddenly 
comes  back  again.  The  actual  words  of  the  rit- 
ual, of  the  liturgy,  of  the  official  doctrine,  prove 
stronger  than  anything  else.  If  a  new  religious 
idea  cannot  manage  to  make  a  radical  breach  with 
the  past  at  the  critical  point — the  rest  may  remain 
as  it  is — and  procure  itself  a  new  '*  body,"  it  can- 
not last ;  it  disappears  again.  There  is  no  tougher 
or  more  conservative  fabric  than  a  properly  consti- 
tuted religion ;  it  can  only  yield  to  a  higher  phase 
by  being  abolished.  No  permanent  effect,  then, 
could   be    expected  in  the  apostolic  age  from  the 


The  Dispersion  189 

twisting  and  turning  of  the  law  so  as  to  make  room 
for  the  new  faith  side  by  side  with  it,  or  so  as  to 
approximate  the  old  religion  to  that  faith.  Some- 
one had  to  stand  up  and  say,  "  The  old  one  is  done 
away  with  ";  he  had  to  brand  any  further  pursuit 
of  it  as  a  sin  ;  he  had  to  show  that  all  things  were 
become  new.  The  man  who  did  that  was  the 
apostle  Paul,  and  it  is  in  having  done  it  that  his 
greatness  in  the  history  of  the  world  consists. 

Paul  is  the  most  luminous  personality  in  the 
history  of  primitive  Christianity,  and  yet  opinions 
differ  widely  as  to  his  true  significance.  Only  a 
few  years  ago  we  had  a  leading  Protestant  theo- 
logian asserting  that  Paul's  rabbinical  theology  led 
him  to  corrupt  the  Christian  religion.  Others,  con- 
versely, have  called  him  the  real  founder  of  that 
religionc  But  in  the  opinion  of  the  great  majority 
of  those  who  have  studied  him  the  true  view  is  that 
he  was  the  one  who  understood  the  Master  and 
continued  his  work.  This  opinion  is  borne  out  by 
the  facts.  Those  who  blame  him  for  corrupting  the 
Christian  religion  have  never  felt  a  single  breath  of 
his  spirit,  and  judge  him  only  by  mere  externals, 
such  as  clothes  and  book-learning;  those  who  extol 
or  criticise  him  as  a  founder  of  religion  are  forced  to 
make  him  bear  witness  against  himself  on  the  main 
point,  and  acknowledge  that  the  consciousness 
which  bore  him  up  and  steeled  him  for  his  work 


igo  What  is  Christianity? 

was  illusory  and  self-deceptive.  As  we  cannot 
want  to  be  wiser  than  history,  which  knows  him 
only  as  Christ's  missionary,  and  as  his  own  words 
clearly  attest  what  his  aims  were  and  what  he  was, 
we  regard  him  as  Christ's  disciple,  as  the  apostle 
who  not  only  worked  harder  but  also  accomplished 
more  than  all  the  rest  put  together. 

It  was  Paul  who  delivered  the  Christian  religion 
from  Judaism.  We  shall  see  how  he  did  that  if  we 
consider  the  following  points: — 

It  was  Paul  who  definitely  conceived  the  Gospel 
as  the  message  of  the  redemption  already  effected 
and  of  salvation  now  present.  He  preached  the 
crucified  and  risen  Christ,  who  gave  us  access  to 
God  and  therewith  righteousness  and  peace. 

It  was  he  who  confidently  regarded  the  Gos- 
pel as  a  new  force  abolishing  the  religion  of  the 
law. 

It  was  he  who  perceived  that  religion  in  its  new 
phase  pertains  to  the  individual  and  therefore  to  all 
individuals;  and  in  this  conviction,  and  with  a  full 
consciousness  of  what  he  was  doing,  he  carried  the 
Gospel  to  the  nations  of  the  world  and  transferred 
it  from  Judaism  to  the  ground  occupied  by  Greece 
and  Rome.  Not  only  are  Greeks  and  Jews  to  unite 
on  the  basis  of  the  Gospel,  but  the  Jewish  dispensa- 
tion itself  is  now  at  an  end.  That  the  Gospel  was 
transplanted   from  the  East,   where  in  subsequent 


Paul  191 

ages  it  was  never  able  to  thrive  properly,  to  the 
West,  is  a  fact  which  we  owe  to  Paul. 

It  was  he  who  placed  the  Gospel  in  the  great 
scheme  of  spirit  and  flesh,  inner  and  outer  exist- 
ence, death  and  life;  he,  born  a  Jew  and  educated 
a  Pharisee,  gave  it  a  language,  so  that  it  became 
intelligible,  not  only  to  the  Greeks  but  to  all  men 
generally,  and  united  with  the  whole  of  the  intel- 
lectual capital  which  had  been  amassed  in  previous 
ages. 

These  are  the  factors  that  go  to  make  the  apostle's 
greatness  in  the  history  of  religion.  On  their  inner 
connexion  I  cannot  here  enter  into  any  detail.  But, 
in  regard  to  the  first  of  them,  I  may  remind  you  of 
the  words  of  the  most  important  historian  of  religion 
in  our  day.  Wellhausen  declares  that  **  Paul's  espe- 
cial work  was  to  transform  the  Gospel  of  the  king- 
dom into  the  Gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  so  that  the 
Gospel  is  no  longer  the  prophecy  of  the  coming  of 
the  kingdom,  but  its  actual  fulfilment  by  Jesus 
Christ.  In  his  view,  accordingly,  redemption  from 
something  in  the  future  has  become  something 
which  has  already  happened  and  is  now  present. 
He  lays  far  more  emphasis  on  faith  than  on  hope; 
he  anticipates  the  sense  of  future  bliss  in  the  present 
feeling  of  being  God's  son ;  he  vanquishes  death 
and  already  leads  the  new  life  on  earth.  He  extols 
the  strength  which  is  made  perfect  in  weakness ;  the 


192  What  is  Christianity? 

grace  of  God  is  sufficient  for  him,  and  he  knows 
that  no  power,  present  or  future,  can  take  him  from 
His  love,  and  that  all  things  work  together  for  good 
to  them  that  love  God/*  What  knowledge,  what 
confidence,  what  strength,  was  necessary  to  tear  the 
new  religion  from  its  mother  earth  and  plant  it  in 
an  entirely  new  one!  Islam,  originating  in  Arabia, 
has  remained  the  Arabian  religion,  no  matter  where 
it  may  have  penetrated.  Buddhism  has  at  all  times 
been  at  its  purest  in  India.  But  this  religion,  born 
in  Palestine,  and  confined  by  its  founder  to  Jewish 
ground,  in  only  a  few  years  after  his  death  was 
severed  from  that  connexion.  Paul  put  it  in  com- 
petition with  the  Israelitish  religion:  "  Christ  is  the 
end  of  the  law."  Not  only  did  it  bear  being  thus 
rooted  up  and  transplanted,  but  it  showed  that  it  was 
meant  to  be  thus  transplanted.  It  gave  stay  and 
support  to  the  Roman  Empire  and  the  whole  world 
of  Western  civilisation.  If,  as  Renan  justly  ob- 
serves, anyone  had  told  the  Roman  Emperor  in  the 
first  century  that  the  little  Jew  who  had  come  from 
Antioch  as  a  missionary  was  his  best  collaborator, 
and  would  put  the  empire  upon  a  stable  basis,  he 
would  have  been  regarded  as  a  madman,  and  yet  he 
would  have  spoken  nothing  but  the  truth.  Paul 
brought  new  forces  to  the  Roman  Empire,  and  laid 
the  foundations  of  Western  and  Christian  civilisa- 
tion.    Alexander  the   Great's  work  has  perished  ; 


Paul  193 

Paul's  has  remained.  But  if  we  praise  the  man 
who,  without  being  able  to  appeal  to  a  single  word 
of  his  Master's,  ventured  upon  the  boldest  enter- 
prise, by  the  help  of  the  spirit  and  with  the  letter 
against  him,  we  must  none  the  less  pay  the  meed  of 
honour  to  those  personal  disciples  of  Jesus  who 
after  a  bitter  internal  struggle  ultimately  associated 
themselves  with  Paul's  principles.  That  Peter  did 
so  we  know  for  certain  ;  of  others  we  hear  that  they 
at  least  acknowledged  their  validity.  It  was,  in- 
deed, no  insignificant  circumstance  that  men  in 
whose  ears  every  word  of  their  Master's  was  still 
ringing,  and  in  whose  recollection  the  concrete 
features  of  his  personality  were  still  a  vivid  memory 
— that  these  faithful  disciples  should  recognise  a 
pronouncement  to  be  true  which  in  important  points 
seemed  to  depart  from  the  original  message  and  por- 
tended the  downfall  of  the  religion  of  Israel.  What 
was  kernel  here,  and  what  was  husk,  history  has 
itself  showed  with  unmistakable  plainness,  and  by 
the  shortest  process.  Husk  were  the  whole  of  the 
Jewish  limitations  attaching  to  Jesus'  message; 
husk  were  also  such  definite  statements  as  "  I  am 
not  sent  but  unto  the  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of 
Israel."  In  the  strength  of  Christ's  spirit  the  dis- 
ciples broke  through  these  barriers.  It  was  his 
personal  disciples  —  not,  as  we  might   expect,  the 

second   or  third    generation,    when   the   immediate 

13 


194  What  is  Christianity? 

memory  of  the  Lord  had  already  paled — who  stood 
the  great  test.  That  is  the  most  remarkable  fact 
of  the  apostolic  age. 

Without  doing  violence  to  the  inner  and  essential 
features  of  the  Gospel — unconditional  trust  in  God 
as  the  Father  of  Jesus  Christ,  confidence  in  the 
Lord,  forgiveness  of  sins,  certainty  of  eternal  life, 
purity  and  brotherly  fellowship — Paul  transformed 
it  into  the  universal  religion,  and  laid  the  ground 
for  the  great  Church.  But  whilst  the  original 
limitations  fell  away,  new  ones  of  necessity  made 
their  appearance ;  and  they  modified  the  simplicity 
and  the  power  of  a  movement  which  was  from 
within.  Before  concluding  our  survey  of  the  apo- 
stolic age,  we  must  direct  attention  to  these  modifi- 
cations. 

In  the  first  place :  the  breach  with  the  Synagogue 
and  the  founding  of  entirely  independent  religious 
communities  had  well-marked  results.  Whilst  the 
idea  was  firmly  maintained  that  the  community  of 
Christ,  the  "  Church,"  was  something  suprasensible 
and  heavenly,  because  it  came  from  within,  there 
was  also  a  conviction  that  the  Church  took  visible 
shape  in  every  separate  community.  As  a  complete 
breach  had  taken  place,  or  no  connexion  been 
established,  with  the  ancient  communion,  the  form- 
ation of  entirely  new  societies  was  logically  invested 
with  a  special  significance,  and  excited  the  liveliest 


Paul  195 

interest.  In  his  sayings  and  parables  Jesus,  care- 
less of  all  externals,  could  devote  himself  solely  to 
the  all-important  point ;  but  how  and  in  what  forms 
the  seed  would  grow  was  not  a  question  which  oc- 
cupied his  mind ;  he  had  the  people  of  Israel  with 
their  historical  ordinances  before  him  and  was  not 
thinking  of  external  changes.  But  the  connexion 
with  this  people  was  now  severed,  and  no  religious 
movement  can  remain  in  a  bodiless  condition.  It 
must  elaborate /brw^f  for  common  life  and  common 
public  worship.  Such  forms,  however,  cannot  be 
improvised ;  some  of  them  take  shape  slowly  out  of 
concrete  necessities;  others  are  derived  from  the 
environment  and  from  existing  circumstances.  It 
was  in  this  way  that  the  ''  Gentile  "  communities 
procured  themselves  an  organism,  a  body.  The 
forms  which  they  developed  were  in  part  independ- 
ent and  gradual,  and  in  part  based  upon  the  facts 
with  which  they  had  to  deal. 

But  a  special  measure  of  value  always  attaches  to 
forms.  By  being  the  means  by  which  the  commun- 
ity is  kept  together,  the  value  of  that  to  which  they 
minister  is  insensibly  transferred  to  them ;  or,  at 
least,  there  is  always  a  danger  of  this  happening. 
One  reason  for  this  is  that  the  observance  of  the 
forms  can  always  be  controlled  or  enforced,  as  the 
case  may  be ;  whilst  for  the  inner  life  there  is  no 
control  that  cannot  be  evaded. 


196  What  is  Christianity? 

When  the  breach  with  the  Jewish  national  com- 
munion had  once  taken  place,  there  could  be  no 
doubt  about  the  necessity  for  setting  up  a  new 
community  in  opposition  to  it.  The  self-conscious- 
ness and  strength  of  the  Christian  movement  was 
displayed  in  the  creation  of  a  Church  which  knew 
itself  to  be  the  true  Israel.  But  the  founding  of 
churches  and  "  the  Church"  on  earth  brought  an 
entirely  new  interest  into  the  field  ;  what  came  from 
within  was  joined  by  something  that  came  from 
without;  law,  discipline,  regulations  for  ritual  and 
doctrine,  were  developed,  and  began  to  assert  a 
position  by  a  logic  of  their  own.  The  measure  of 
value  applicable  to  religion  itself  no  longer  re- 
mained the  only  measure,  and  with  a  hundred  in- 
visible threads  religion  was  insensibly  worked  into 
the  net  of  history. 

In  the  second  place :  we  have  already  referred  to 
the  fact  that  it  was,  above  all,  in  his  Christology  that 
Paul's  significance  as  a  teacher  consisted.  In  his 
view — we  see  this  as  well  by  the  way  in  which  he 
illuminated  the  death  on  the  cross  and  the  resur- 
rection as  by  his  equation,  "  the  Lord  is  a  Spirit  " 
— the  Redemption  is  already  accomplished  and  sal- 
vation a  present  power.  "  God  hath  reconciled  us 
to  himself  through  Jesus  Christ  "  ;  **  If  any  man  be 
in  Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature  "  ;  ''  Who  shall  se- 
parate us  from  the  love  of  God  ?  "     The  absolute 


Paul  197 

character  of  the  Christian  religion  is  thus  made 
clear.  But  it  may  also  be  observed  in  this  connex- 
ion that  every  attempt  to  formulate  a  theory  has  a 
logic  of  its  own  and  dangers  of  its  own.  There 
was  one  danger  which  the  apostle  himself  had  to 
combat,  that  of  men  claiming  to  be  redeemed  with- 
out giving  practical  proof  of  the  new  life.  In  the 
case  of  Jesus'  sayings  no  such  danger  could  arise, 
but  Paul's  formulas  were  not  similarly  protected. 
That  men  are  not  to  rely  upon  "  redemption,"  for- 
giveness of  sin,  and  justification,  if  the  hatred  of 
sin  and  the  imitation  of  Christ  be  lacking,  inevitably 
became  in  subsequent  ages  a  standing  theme  with 
all  earnest  teachers.  Who  can  fail  to  recognise 
that  the  doctrines  of  '*  objective  redemption  "  have 
been  the  occasion  of  grievous  temptations  in  the 
history  of  the  Church,  and  for  whole  generations 
concealed  the  true  meaning  of  religion  ?  The  con- 
ception of  "  redemption,"  which  cannot  be  inserted 
in  Jesus'  teaching  in  this  free  and  easy  way  at  all, 
became  a  snare.  No  doubt  it  is  true  that  Christian- 
ity is  the  religion  of  redemption  ;  but  the  conception 
is  a  delicate  one,  and  must  never  be  taken  out  of 
the  sphere  of  personal  experience  and  inner  re- 
formation. 

But  here  we  are  met  by  a  second  danger  closely 
connected  with  the  first.  If  redemption  is  to  be 
traced    to    Christ's    person    and   work,    everything 


igS  What  is  Christianity? 

would  seem  to  depend  upon  a  right  understanding 
of  this  person  together  with  what  he  accomplished. 
The  formation  of  a  correct  theory  of  and  about 
Christ  threatens  to  assume  the  position  of  chief  im- 
portance, and  to  pervert  the  majesty  and  simplicity 
of  the  Gospel.  Here,  again,  the  danger  is  of  a 
kind  such  as  cannot  arise  with  Jesus*  sayings.  Even 
in  John  we  read:  **  If  ye  love  me,  keep  my  com- 
mandments." But  with  the  way  in  which  Paul 
defined  the  theory  of  religion,  the  danger  can 
certainly  arise  and  did  arise.  No  long  period 
elapsed  before  it  was  taught  in  the  Church  that  the 
all-important  thing  is  to  know  how  the  person  of 
Jesus  was  constituted,  what  sort  of  physical  nature 
he  had,  and  so  on.  Paul  himself  is  far  removed 
from  this  position, — "  Whoso  calleth  Christ  Lord 
speaketh  by  the  Holy  Ghost," — but  the  way  in 
which  he  ordered  his  religious  conceptions,  as  the 
outcome  of  his  speculative  ideas,  unmistakably 
exercised  an  influence  in  a  wrong  direction.  That, 
however  great  the  attraction  which  his  way  of 
ordering  them  may  possess  for  the  understanding, 
it  is  a  perverse  proceeding  to  make  Christology  the 
fundamental  substance  of  the  Gospel  is  shown  by 
Christ's  teaching,  which  is  everywhere  directed  to 
the  all-important  point,  and  summarily  confronts 
every  man  with  his  God.  This  does  not  affect 
Paul's  right  to  epitomise  the  Gospel  in  the  message 


Paul  199 

of  Christ  crucified,  thus  exhibiting  God's  power  and 
God's  wisdom,  and  in  the  love  of  Christ  kindling 
the  love  of  God.  There  are  thousands  to-day  in 
whom  the  Christian  faith  is  still  propagated  in  the 
same  manner,  namely,  through  Christ.  But  to 
demand  assent  to  a  series  of  propositions  about 
Christ's  person  is  a  different  thing  altogether. 

There  is,  however,  another  point  to  be  considered 
here.  Under  the  influence  of  the  Messianic  dog- 
mas, and  led  by  the  impression  which  Christ  made, 
Paul  became  the  author  of  the  speculative  idea  that 
not  only  was  God  in  Christ,  but  that  Christ  himself 
was  possessed  of  a  peculiar  nature  of  a  heavenly 
kind.  With  the  Jews,  this  was  not  a  notion  that 
necessarily  shattered  the  framework  of  the  Messianic 
idea;  but  with  the  Greeks  it  inevitably  set  an  en- 
tirely new  theory  in  motion.  Christ's  appearance 
in  itself,  the  entrance  of  a  divine  being  into  the 
world,  came  of  necessity  to  rank  as  the  chief  fact, 
as  itself  the  real  redemption.  Paul  did  not,  indeed, 
himself  look  upon  it  in  this  light ;  for  him  the 
crucial  facts  are  the  death  on  the  cross  and  the 
resurrection,  and  he  regards  Christ's  entrance  into 
the  world  from  an  ethical  point  of  view  and  as  an 
example  for  us  to  follow:  "  For  our  sakes  he  be- 
came poor";  he  humbled  himself  and  renounced 
the  world.  But  this  state  of  things  could  not  last. 
The    fact    of   redemption    could   not   permanently 


200  What  is  Christianity  ? 

occupy  the  second  place;  it  was  too  large.  But 
when  moved  into  the  first  place  it  threatened  the 
very  existence  of  the  Gospel,  by  drawing  away 
men's  thoughts  and  interests  in  another  direction. 
When  we  look  at  the  history  of  dogma,  who  can  deny 
that  that  was  what  happened^?  To  what  extent 
it  happened  we  shall  see  in  the  following  lectures. 

In  the  third  place :  the  new  Church  possessed  a 
sacred  book,  the  Old  Testament.  Paul,  although 
he  taught  that  the  law  had  become  of  no  avail, 
found  a  means  of  preserving  the  v/hole  of  the  Old 
Testament.  What  a  blessing  to  the  Church  this 
book  has  proved  !  As  a  book  of  edification,  of  con- 
solation, of  wisdom,  of  counsel,  as  a  book  of  his- 
tory, what  an  incomparable  importance  it  has  had 
for  Christian  life  and  apologetics!  Which  of  the 
religions  that  Christianity  encountered  on  Greek  or 
Roman  ground  could  boast  of  a  similar  book  ?  Yet 
the  possession  of  this  book  has  not  been  an  un- 
qualified advantage  to  the  Church.  To  begin  with, 
there  are  many  of  its  pages  which  exhibit  a  religion 
and  a  morality  other  than  Christian.  No  matter 
how  resolutely  people  tried  to  spiritualise  it  and 
give  it  an  inner  meaning  by  construing  it  in  some 
special  way,  their  efforts  did  not  avail  to  get  rid  of 
the  original  sense  in  its  entirety.  There  was 
always  a  danger  of  an  inferior  and  obsolete  prin- 
ciple forcing  its  way  into  Christianity  through  the 


Paul  20 1 

Old  Testament.  This,  indeed,  was  what  actually 
occurred.  Nor  was  it  only  in  individual  aspects 
that  it  occurred :  the  whole  aim  was  changed. 
Moreover,  on  the  new  ground  religion  was  intim- 
ately connected  with  a  political  power,  namel}^,  with 
nationality.  How  if  people  were  seduced  into 
again  seeking  such  a  connexion,  not,  indeed,  with 
Judaism,  but  with  a  new  nation,  and  not  with  an- 
cient national  laws,  but  with  something  of  an  ana- 
logous character  ?  And  when  even  a  Paul  here 
and  there  declared  Old  Testament  laws  to  be  still 
authoritative  in  spite  of  their  having  undergone  an 
allegorical  transformation,  how  could  anyone  re- 
strain his  successors  from  also  proclaiming  other 
laws,  remodelled  to  suit  the  circumstances  of  the 
time,  as  valid  ordinances  of  God  ?  This  brings 
us  to  the  second  point.  Although  whatever  was 
drawn  from  the  Old  Testament  by  way  of  authori- 
tative precept  may  have  been  inoffensive  in  sub- 
stance, it  was  a  menace  to  Christian  freedom  of 
both  kinds.  It  threatened  the  freedom  which 
comes  from  within,  and  also  the  freedom  to  form 
church  communities  and  to  arrange  for  public  wor- 
ship and  discipline. 

I  have  tried  to  show  that  the  limitations  which 
surrounded  the  Gospel  did  not  cease  with  the  sever- 
ance of  the  tie  binding  it  to  Judaism,  but  that,  on 


202  What  is  Christianity  ? 

the  contrary,  new  limits  made  their  appearance. 
They  arose,  however,  just  at  the  very  points  upon 
which  the  necessary  progress  of  things  depended, 
or,  as  the  case  might  be,  where  an  inalienable  pos- 
session like  the  Old  Testament  was  in  question. 
Here,  again,  then,  we  are  reminded  of  the  fact 
that,  so  far  as  history  is  concerned,  as  soon  as  we 
leave  the  sphere  of  pure  inwardness  there  is  no 
progress,  no  achievement,  no  advantage  of  any 
sort  that  has  not  its  dark  side  and  does  not  bring 
its  disadvantages  with  it.  The  apostle  Paul  com- 
plained that  **  we  know  in  part."  To  a  much 
greater  degree  is  the  same  thing  true  of  our  actions 
and  of  everything  connected  with  them.  We  have 
always  to  "  pay  the  penalty  "  of  acting,  and  not 
only  take  the  evil  consequences,  but  also  knowingly 
and  with  open  eyes  resolutely  neglect  one  thing  in 
order  to  gain  another.  Our  purest  and  most  sacred 
possessions,  when  they  leave  the  inward  realm  and 
pass  into  the  world  of  form  and  circumstance,  are 
no  exception  to  the  rule  that  the  very  shape  which 
they  take  in  action  also  proves  to  be  their  limitation. 

When  the  great  apostle  ended  his  life  under 
Nero's  axe  in  the  year  64,  he  could  say  of  himself 
what  a  short  time  before  he  had  written  to  a  faith- 
ful comrade:  **  I  have  finished  my  course;  I  have 
kept  the  faith."     What  missionary  is  there,  what 


Paul  203 

preacher,  what  man  entrusted  with  the  cure  of 
souls,  who  can  be  compared  with  him,  whether  in 
the  greatness  of  the  task  which  he  accomplished 
or  in  the  holy  energy  with  which  he  carried  it  out  ? 
He  worked  with  the  most  living  of  all  messages, 
and  kindled  a  fire ;  he  cared  for  his  people  like  a 
father  and  strove  for  the  souls  of  others  with  all  the 
forces  of  his  own ;  at  the  same  time  he  discharged 
the  duties  of  the  teacher,  the  schoolmaster,  the 
organiser.  When  he  sealed  his  work  by  his  death, 
the  Roman  Empire  from  Antioch  as  far  as  Rome, 
nay,  as  far  as  Spain,  was  planted  with  Christian 
communities.  There  were  to  be  found  in  them  few 
that  were  **  mighty  after  the  flesh  "  or  of  noble  de- 
gree, and  yet  they  were  as  "  lights  in  the  world," 
and  on  them  the  progress  of  the  world's  history 
rested.  They  had  little  **  illumination,"  but  they 
had  acquired  the  faith  in  the  living  God  and  in  a 
life  eternal;  they  knew  that  the  value  of  the  human 
soul  is  infinite,  and  that  its  value  is  determined  by 
relation  to  the  invisible;  they  led  a  life  of  purity 
and  brotherly  fellowship,  or  at  least  strove  after 
such  a  life.  Bound  together  into  a  new  people  in 
Jesus  Christ,  their  head,  they  were  filled  with  the 
high  consciousness  that  Jews  and  Greeks,  Greeks 
and  barbarians,  would  through  them  become  one, 
and  that  the  last  and  highest  stage  in  the  history  of 
humanity  had  then  been  reached. 


LECTURE   XI 

TH  E  apostolic  age  now  lies  behind  us.  We  have 
seen  that  in  the  course  of  it  the  Gospel  was 
detached  from  the  mother  soil  of  Judaism  and 
placed  upon  the  broad  field  of  the  Graeco-Roman 
Empire.  The  apostle  Paul  was  the  chief  agent  in 
accomplishing  this  work,  and  in  thereby  giving 
Christianity  its  place  in  the  history  of  the  world. 
The  new  connexion  which  it  thus  received  did  not 
in  itself  denote  any  restricted  activity;  on  the  con- 
trary, the  Christian  religion  was  intended  to  be 
realised  in  mankind,  and  mankind  at  that  time 
meant  the  orbis  Roinanus.  But  the  new  connexion 
involved  the  development  of  new  forms,  and  new 
forms  also  meant  limitation  and  encumbrance. 
We  shall  see  more  closely  how  this  was  effected  if 
we  consider 

THE   CHRISTIAN    RELIGION   IN   ITS    DEVELOPMENT 
INTO    CATHOLICISM 

The  Gospel  did  not  come  into  the  world  as  a 
statutory  religion,  and  therefore  none  of  the  froms 
in  v^hich  it  assumed  intellectual  and  social  expres- 

204 


Catholicism  205 

sion — not  even  the  earliest — can  be  regarded  as 
possessing  a  classical  and  permanent  character. 
The  historian  must  always  keep  this  guiding  idea 
before  him  when  he  undertakes  to  trace  the  course 
of  the  Christian  religion  through  the  centuries  from 
the  apostolic  age  downwards.  As  Christianity  rises 
above  all  antitheses  of  the  Here  and  the  Beyond, 
life  and  death,  work  and  the  shunning  of  the  world, 
reason  and  ecstasy,  Hebraism  and  Hellenism,  it  can 
also  exist  under  the  most  diverse  conditions ;  just  as 
it  was  originally  amid  the  wreck  of  the  Jewish  re- 
ligion that  it  developed  its  power.  Not  only  can  it 
so  exist — it  must  do  so,  if  it  is  to  be  the  religion  of 
the  living  and  is  itself  to  live.  As  a  Gospel  it  has 
only  one  aim — the  finding  of  the  living  God,  the 
finding  of  Him  by  every  individual  as  his  God,  and 
as  the  source  of  strength  and  joy  and  peace.  How 
this  aim  is  progressively  realised  through  the  cent- 
uries— whether  with  the  coefficients  of  Hebraism 
or  Hellenism,  of  the  shunning  of  the  world  or  of 
civilisation,  of  Gnosticism  or  of  Agnosticism,  of 
ecclesiastical  institution  or  of  perfectly  free  union, 
or  by  whatever  other  kinds  of  bark  the  core  may  be 
protected,  the  sap  allowed  to  rise — is  a  matter  that 
is  of  secondary  moment,  that  is  exposed  to  change, 
that  belongs  to  the  centuries,  that  comes  with  them 
and  with  them  perishes. 

Now  the  greatest  transformation  which  the  new 


2o6  What  is  Christianity  ? 

religion  ever  experienced — almost  greater  even  than 
that  which  gave  rise  to  the  Gentile  Church  and 
thrust  the  Palestinian  communities  into  the  back- 
ground— falls  in  the  second  century  of  our  era,  and 
therefore  in  the  period  which  we  shall  consider  in 
the  present  lecture. 

If  we  place  ourselves  at  about  the  year  200,  about 
a  hundred  or  a  hundred  and  twenty  years  after  the 
apostolic  age, — not  more  than  three  or  four  genera- 
tions had  gone  by  since  that  age  came  to  an  end, — 
what  kind  of  spectacle  does  the  Christian  religion 
offer  ? 

We  see  a  great  ecclesiastical  and  political  com- 
munity, and  side  by  side  with  it  numerous  "  sects  " 
calling  themselves  Christian,  but  denied  the  name 
and  bitterly  opposed.  That  great  ecclesiastical  and 
political  community  presents  itself  as  a  league  of 
individual  communities  spanning  the  empire  from 
end  to  end.  Although  independent  they  are  all 
constituted  essentially  alike,  and  interconnected  by 
one  and  the  same  law  of  doctrine,  and  by  fixed  rules 
for  the  purposes  of  intercommunion.  The  law  of 
doctrine  seems  at  first  sight  to  be  of  small  scope, 
but  all  its  tenets  are  of  the  widest  significance;  and 
together  they  embrace  a  profusion  of  metaphysical, 
cosmological,  and  historical  problems,  give  them 
definite  answers,  and  supply  particulars  of  mankind's 
development  from  the  creation  up  to  its  future  form 


Catholicism  207 

of  existence.  Jesus'  injunctions  for  the  conduct  of 
life  are  not  included  in  this  law  of  doctrine ;  as  the 
"rule  of  discipline"  they  were  sharply  distinguished 
from  the  "  rule  of  faith."  Each  Church,  however, 
also  presents  itself  as  an  institution  for  public  wor- 
ship, where  God  is  honoured  in  conformity  with  a 
solemn  ritual.  The  distinction  between  priests  and 
laymen  is  already  a  well-marked  characteristic  of 
this  institution  ;  certain  acts  of  divine  worship  can  be 
performed  only  by  the  priest ;  his  mediation  is  an 
absolute  necessity.  It  is  only  by  mediation  that  a 
man  can  approach  God  at  all,  by  the  mediation  of 
right  doctrine,  right  ordinance,  and  a  sacred  book. 
The  living  faith  seems  to  be  transformed  into  a 
creed  to  be  believed  ;  devotion  to  Christ,  into 
Christology;  the  ardent  hope  for  the  coming  of 
**  the  kingdom,"  into  a  doctrine  of  immortality 
and  deification;  prophecy,  into  technical  exegesis 
and  theological  learning;  the  ministers  of  the 
Spirit,  into  clerics;  the  brothers,  into  laymen  in  a 
state  of  tutelage;  miracles  and  miraculous  cures 
disappear  altogether,  or  else  are  priestly  devices; 
fervent  prayers  become  solemn  hymns  and  litanies; 
the  **  Spirit  "  becomes  law  and  compulsion.  At 
the  same  time  individual  Christians  are  in  full  touch 
with  the  life  of  the  world,  and  the  burning  question 
is,  **  In  how  much  of  this  life  may  I  take  part  with- 
out  losing   my  position    as   a   Christian  ? "      This 


2o8  What  is  Christianity  ? 

enormous  transformation  took  place  within  a  hun- 
dred and  twenty  years.  The  first  thing  which  we 
have  to  determine  is,  How  did  that  happen  ?  next, 
Did  the  Gospel  succeed  in  holding  its  own  amid 
this  change,  and  how  did  it  do  so  ? 

Before,  however,  we  try  to  answer  these  two 
questions,  we  must  call  to  mind  a  piece  of  advice 
which  no  historian  ought  ever  to  neglect.  Anyone 
who  wants  to  determine  the  real  value  and  signific- 
ance of  any  great  phenomenon  or  mighty  product 
of  history  must  first  and  foremost  inquire  into  the 
work  which  it  accomplished,  or,  as  the  case  may  be, 
into  the  problem  which  it  solved.  As  every  in- 
dividual has  a  right  to  be  judged,  not  by  this  or 
that  virtue  or  defect,  not  by  his  talents  or  by  his 
frailties,  but  by  what  he  has  done,  so  the  great 
edifices  of  history,  the  states  and  the  churches, 
must  be  estimated,  first  and  foremost,  we  may  per- 
haps say  exclusively,  by  what  they  have  achieved. 
It  is  the  work  done  that  forms  the  decisive  test. 
With  any  other  test  we  are  involved  in  judgments 
of  the  vaguest  kind,  now  optimistic,  now  pessimis- 
tic and  mere  historical  twaddle.  So  here,  too,  in 
considering  the  Church  as  developed  into  Catholic- 
ism, we  must  first  of  all  ask,  In  what  did  its  work 
consist  ?  What  problem  did  it  solve  ?  What  did 
it  achieve  ?     I  will  answer  the  last  question  first. 


Catholicism  209 

It  achieved  two  things:  it  waged  war  with  nature- 
worship,  polytheism,  and  political  religion,  and  beat 
them  back  with  great  energy;  and  it  exploded  the 
dualistic  philosophy  of  religion.  Had  the  Church 
at  the  beginning  of  the  third  century  been  asked  in 
tones  of  reproach,  "  How  could  you  recede  so  far 
from  where  you  began  ?  To  what  have  you  come  ?  " 
it  might  have  answered:  "  Yes,  it  is  to  this  that  I 
have  come:  I  have  been  obliged  to  discard  much 
and  admit  much ;  I  have  had  to  fight  —  my  body 
is  full  of  scars,  and  my  clothes  are  covered  with 
dust;  but  I  have  won  my  battles  and  built  my 
house ;  I  have  beaten  back  polytheism ;  I  have 
disabled  and  almost  annihilated  that  monstrous 
abortion,  political  religion ;  I  have  resisted  the 
enticements  of  a  subtle  religious  philosophy,  and 
victoriously  encountered  it  with  God,  the  almighty 
Creator  of  all  things;  lastly,  I  have  reared  a  great 
building,  a  fortress  with  towers  and  bulwarks,  where 
I  guard  my  treasure  and  protect  the  weak."  This 
is  the  answer  which  the  Church  might  have  given, 
and  truthfully  given.  But,  someone  may  object, 
it  was  no  great  achievement  to  wage  war  with 
nature-worship  and  polytheism,  and  to  beat  them 
back;  they  had  already  rotted  and  decayed,  and 
had  little  strength  left.  The  objection  does  not 
hold.  Many  of  the  forms  in  which  that  species 
of    religion    had    taken    shape    were,    no    doubt, 


2IO  What  is  Christianity? 

antiquated  and  approaching  extinction,  but  the  re- 
ligion itself,  the  religion  of  nature ^  was  a  mighty  foe. 
It  even  still  avails  to  beguile  our  souls  and  touch  our 
heart-strings  with  effect,  when  an  inspired  prophet 
voices  its  message ;  how  much  more  so  then  !  The 
hymn  to  the  Sun,  giving  life  to  all  that  lives,  pro- 
duced a  profound  and  lifelong  religious  impression 
even  upon  a  Goethe,  and  made  him  into  a  Sun- 
worshipper.  But  how  overpowering  it  was  in  the 
days  before  science  had  banished  the  gods  from  na- 
ture !  Christianity  exploded  the  religion  of  nature, 
— exploded  it  not  for  this  or  that  individual ;  that 
was  already  done, — but  exploded  it  in  the  sense  that 
there  was  now  a  large  and  compact  community  re- 
futing nature-worship  and  polytheism  by  its  im- 
pressive doctrines,  and  affording  the  deeper  religious 
temper  stay  and  support.  And  then  political 
religion!  Behind  the  imperial  cult  there  was  the 
whole  power  of  the  state,  and  to  come  to  terms 
with  it  looked  so  safe  and  easy — yet  the  Church  did 
not  yield  a  single  inch;  it  abolished  the  imperial 
system  of  state-idols.  It  was  to  place  an  irremov- 
able landmark  between  religion  and  politics,  be- 
tween God  and  Caesar,  that  the  martyrs  shed  their 
blood.  Lastly,  in  an  age  that  was  deeply  moved 
by  questions  of  religious  philosophy,  the  Church 
maintained  a  firm  front  against  all  the  speculative 
ideas  of  dualism ;  and,  although  these  ideas  often 


Catholicism  2 1 1 

seemed  to  approximate  closely  to  its  own  position, 
it  passionately  met  them  with  the  monotheistic 
view.  The  struggle  here,  however,  was  rendered 
all  the  harder  by  the  fact  that  many  Christians — 
and  just  the  very  prominent  and  gifted  ones  too — 
made  common  cause  with  the  enemy,  and  them- 
selves embraced  the  dualistic  theory.  The  Church 
stood  firm.  If  we  recollect  that,  in  spite  of  these 
counter-movements  against  the  Graeco-Roman 
spirit,  it  also  managed  to  attach  this  very  spirit  to 
itself — otherwise  than  Judaism,  of  whose  dealings 
with  the  Greek  world  the  saying  holds,  '*  You  had 
power  to  draw  but  not  to  keep  me  " ;  if  we  recol- 
lect, further,  that  it  was  in  the  second  century  that 
the  foundations  of  the  whole  of  the  ecclesiastical 
system  prevailing  up  to  the  present  day  were  laid, 
we  can  only  be  astonished  at  the  greatness  of  the 
work  which  was  then  achieved. 

We  now  return  to  the  two  questions  which  we 
raised :  How  was  this  great  transformation  accom- 
plished? and,  Did  the  Gospel  hold  its  own  amid  this 
change,  or,  if  so,  how  ? 

There  were,  if  I  am  not  mistaken,  three  leading 
forces  engaged  in  bringing  about  this  great  revolu- 
tion, and  effecting  the  organisation  of  new  forms. 
The  first  of  these  forces  tallies  with  the  universal 
law  in  the  history  of  religion,  for  in  every  religious 


2 1 2  What  is  Christianity  ? 

development  we  find  it  at  work.  When  the  second 
and  third  generations  after  the  founding  of  a  new  re- 
ligion have  passed  away ;  when  hundreds,  nay,  thou- 
sands, have  become  its  adherents,  no  longer  through 
conversion  but  by  the  influences  of  tradition  and 
of  birth,  despite  Tertullian's  saying:  jiunty  non  nas- 
cuntur  Christiani ;  when  those  who  have  laid  hold 
upon  the  faith  as  great  spoil  are  joined  by  crowds 
of  others  who  wrap  it  round  them  like  an  outer  gar- 
ment, a  revolution  always  occurs.  The  religion  of 
strong  feeling  and  of  the  heart  passes  into  the  re- 
ligion of  custom  and  therefore  of  form  and  of  law. 
A  new  religion  may  be  instituted  with  the  greatest 
vigour,  the  utmost  enthusiasm,  and  a  tremendous 
amount  of  inner  emotion ;  it  may  at  the  same  time 
lay  ever  so  much  stress  on  spiritual  freedom — where 
was  all  this  ever  more  powerfully  expressed  than  in 
Paul's  teaching  ? — and  yet,  even  though  believers 
be  forced  to  be  celibates  and  only  adults  be  received, 
the  process  of  solidifying  and  codifying  the  religion 
is  bound  to  follow.  Its  forms  then  at  once  stiffen ; 
in  the  very  process  of  stiffening  they  receive  for  the 
first  time  a  real  significance,  and  new  forms  are  added. 
Not  only  do  they  acquire  the  value  of  laws  and 
regulations,  but  they  come  to  be  insensibly  regarded 
as  though  they  contained  within  them  the  very  sub- 
stance of  religion ;  nay,  as  though  they  were  them- 
selves that  substance.     This  is  the  way  in    which 


Catholicism  2 1 3 

people  who  do  not  feel  religion  to  be  a  reality  are 
compelled  to  regard  it,  for  otherwise  they  would 
have  nothing  at  all ;  and  this  is  the  way  in  which 
those  who  continue  really  to  live  in  it  are  compelled 
to  handle  it,  or  else  they  would  be  unable  to  exer- 
cise any  influence  upon  others.  The  former  are  not 
by  any  means  necessarily  hypocrites.  Real  religion, 
of  course,  is  a  closed  book  to  them ;  its  most  im- 
portant element  has  evaporated.  But  there  are 
various  points  of  view  from  which  a  man  may  still 
be  able  to  appreciate  religion  without  living  in  it. 
He  may  appreciate  it  as  discharging  the  functions 
of  morality,  or  of  police ;  above  all  he  may  appreci- 
ate it  on  aesthetic  grounds.  When  the  Romanticists 
re-introduced  Catholicism  into  Germany  and  France 
at  the  beginning  of  the  nineteenth  century,  Chateau- 
briand, more  especially,  was  never  tired  of  sing- 
ing its  praises  and  fancied  that  he  had  all  the 
feelings  of  a  Catholic.  But  an  acute  critic  remarked 
that  Monsieur  Chateaubriand  was  mistaken  in  his 
feelings;  he  thought  that  he  was  a  true  Catholic, 
while  as  a  matter  of  fact  he  was  only  standing  be- 
fore the  ancient  ruin  of  the  Church  and  exclaiming: 
"  How  beautiful!"  That  is  one  of  the  ways  in 
which  a  man  can  appreciate  a  religion  without  be- 
ing an  inward  adherent  of  it ;  but  there  are  many 
others,  and,  amongst  them,  some  in  which  a  nearer 
approach   is  made  to  its   true   substance.     All    of 


214  What  is  Christianity? 

them,  however,  have  this  much  in  common,  that  any 
actual  experience  of  religion  is  no  longer  felt,  or  felt 
only  in  an  uncertain  and  intermittent  way.  Con- 
versely, a  high  regard  is  paid  to  the  outward  shows 
and  influences  connected  with  it,  and  they  are  care- 
fully maintained.  Whatever  finds  expression  in 
doctrines,  regulations,  ordinances,  and  forms  of  pub- 
lic worship  comes  to  be  treated  as  the  thing  itself. 
This,  then,  is  the  first  force  at  work  in  the  trans- 
formation :  the  original  enthusiasm^  in  the  large  sense 
of  the  word,  evaporates,  and  the  religion  of  law  and 
form  at  once  arises. 

But  not  only  did  an  original  element  evaporate  in 
the  course  of  the  second  century :  another  was  in- 
troduced. Even  had  this  youthful  religion  not  sev- 
ered the  tie  which  bound  it  to  Judaism,  it  would 
have  been  inevitably  affected  by  the  spirit  and  the 
civilisation  of  that  Graeco-Roman  world  on  whose 
soil  it  was  permanently  settled.  But  to  how  much 
greater  an  extent  was  it  exposed  to  the  influence 
of  this  spirit  after  being  sharply  severed  from  the 
Jewish  religion  and  the  Jewish  nation.  It  hovered 
bodiless  over  the  earth  like  a  being  of  the  air ;  bodi- 
less and  seeking  a  body.  The  spirit,  no  doubt, 
makes  to  itself  its  own  body,  but  it  does  so  by  as- 
similating what  is  around  it.  The  influx  of  Hel- 
lenism, of  the  Greek  spirit,  and  the  union  of  the 
Gospel  with  it,  form  the  greatest  fact  in  the  history 


Greek  Philosophy  215 

of  the  Church  in  the  second  century,  and  when  the 
fact  was  once  established  as  a  foundation  it  contin- 
ued through  the  following  centuries.  In  the  influ- 
ence of  Hellenism  on  the  Christian  religion  three 
stages  may  be  distinguished,  and  a  preliminary 
stage  as  well.  We  have  already  mentioned  the 
preliminary  stage  in  a  previous  lecture.  It  is  to  be 
found  in  the  circumstances  in  which  the  Gospel 
arose,  and  it  formed  a  very  condition  of  its  appear- 
ance. Not  until  Alexander  the  Great  had  created 
an  entirely  new  position  of  affairs,  and  the  barriers 
separating  the  nations  of  the  East  from  one  another 
and  from  Hellenism  had  been  destroyed,  could 
Judaism  free  itself  from  its  limitations  and  start 
upon  its  development  into  a  religion  for  the  world. 
The  time  was  ripe  when  a  man  in  the  East  could 
also  breathe  the  air  of  Greece  and  see  his  spiritual 
horizon  stretch  beyond  the  limits  of  his  own  nation. 
Yet  we  cannot  say  that  the  earliest  Christian  writ- 
ings, let  alone  the  Gospel,  show,  to  any  considera- 
ble extent,  the  presence  of  a  Greek  element.  If  we 
are  to  look  for  it  anywhere — apart  from  certain  well- 
marked  traces  of  it  in  Paul,  Luke,  and  John — it 
must  be  in  the  possibility  of  the  new  religion  appear- 
ing at  all.  We  cannot  enter  further  upon  this 
question  here.  The  first  stage  of  any  real  influx  of 
definitely  Greek  thought  and  Greek  life  is  to  be 
fixed  at  about  the  year  130.     It  was  then  that  the 


2i6  What  is  Christianity? 

religious  philosophy  of  Greece  began  to  effect  an 
entrance,  and  it  went  straight  to  the  centre  of  the 
new  religion.  It  sought  to  get  into  inner  touch 
with  Christianity,  and,  conversely,  Christianity 
itself  held  out  a  hand  to  this  ally.  We  are  speak- 
ing of  Qx^^V  philosophy  ;  as  yet,  there  is  no  trace  of 
mythology,  Greek  worship,  and  so  on ;  all  that  was 
taken  up  into  the  Church,  cautiously  and  under 
proper  guarantees,  was  the  great  capital  which  philo- 
sophy had  amassed  since  the  days  of  Socrates.  A 
century  or  so  later,  about  the  year  220  or  230,  the 
second  stage  begins :  Greek  mysteries,  and  Greek 
civilisation  in  the  whole  range  of  its  development, 
exercise  their  influence  on  the  Church,  but  not 
mythology  and  polytheism ;  these  were  still  to 
come.  Another  century,  however,  had  in  its  turn 
to  elapse  before  Hellenism  as  a  whole  and  in  every 
phase  of  its  development  was  established  in  the 
Church.  Guarantees,  of  course,  are  not  lacking 
here  either,  but  for  the  most  part  they  consist  only 
in  a  change  of  label;  the  thing  itself  is  taken  over 
without  alteration,  and  in  the  worship  of  the  saints 
we  see  a  regular  Christian  religion  of  a  lower  order 
arising.  We  are  here  concerned,  however,  not  with 
the  second  and  third  stages,  but  only  with  that  in- 
flux of  the  Greek  spirit  which  was  marked  by  the 
absorption  of  Greek  philosophy  and,  particularly, 
of  Platonism.     Who  can  deny  that  elements  here 


The  Loo;-os  217 


& 


came  together  which  stood  in  elective  affinity  ?  So 
much  depth  and  delicacy  of  feeling,  so  much  earn- 
estness and  dignity,  and — above  all — so  strong  a 
monotJieistic  piety  were  displayed  in  the  religious 
ethics  of  the  Greeks,  acquired  as  it  had  been  by 
hard  toil  on  a  basis  of  inner  experience  and  meta- 
physical speculation,  that  the  Christian  religion 
could  not  pass  this  treasure  by  with  indifference. 
There  was  much  in  it,  indeed,  which  was  defective 
and  repellent;  there  was  no  personality  visibly  em- 
bodying its  ethics  as  a  living  power ;  it  still  kept  up 
a  strange  connexion  with  "demon-worship"  and 
polytheism ;  but  both  as  a  whole  and  in  its  individ- 
ual parts  it  was  felt  to  contain  a  kindred  element, 
and  it  was  absorbed. 

But  besides  the  Greek  ethics  there  was  also  a  cos- 
mological  conception  which  the  Church  took  over  at 
this  time,  and  which  was  destined  in  a  few  decades 
to  attain  a  commanding  position  in  its  doctrinal 
system — tJie  Logos.  Starting  from  an  examination 
of  the  world  and  the  life  within,  Greek  thought  had 
arrived  at  the  conception  of  an  active  central  idea — 
by  what  stages  we  need  not  here  mention.  This 
central  idea  represented  the  unity  of  the  supreme 
principle  of  the  world,  of  thought,  and  of  ethics; 
but  it  also  represented,  at  the  same  time,  the  divin- 
ity itself  as  a  creative  and  active,  as  distinguished 
from  a  quiescent,  power.     The  most  important  step 


2 1 8  What  is  Christianity  ? 

that  was  ever  taken  in  the  domain  of  Christian  doc- 
trine was  when  the  Christian  apologists  at  the  be- 
ginning of  the  second  century  drew  the  equation: 
the  Logos  =  Jesus  Christ.  Ancient  teachers  before 
them  had  also  called  Christ  "  the  Logos"  among 
the  many  predicates  which  they  ascribed  to  him ; 
nay,  one  of  them,  John,  had  already  formulated  the 
proposition:  **  The  Logos  is  Jesus  Christ."  But 
with  John  this  proposition  had  not  become  the  basis 
of  every  speculative  idea  about  Christ;  with  him, 
too,  **  the  Logos"  was  only  a  predicate.  But  now 
teachers  came  forward  who  previous  to  their  con- 
version had  been  adherents  of  the  platonico-stoical 
philosophy,  and  with  whom  the  conception 
"  Logos"  formed  an  inalienable  part  of  a  general 
philosophy  of  the  world.  They  proclaimed  that 
Jesus  Christ  was  the  Logos  incarnate,  which  had 
hitherto  been  revealed  only  in  the  great  effects 
which  it  exercised.  In  the  place  of  the  entirely  un- 
intelligible conception  "  Messiah,"  an  intelligible 
one  was  acquired  at  a  stroke;  Christology,  totter- 
ing under  the  exuberance  of  its  own  affirmations, 
received  a  stable  basis;  Christ's  significance  for  the 
world  was  established ;  his  mysterious  relation  to 
•God  was  explained;  the  cosmos,  reason,  and  ethics 
were  comprehended  as  one.  It  was,  indeed,  a  mar- 
vellous formula ;  and  was  not  the  way  prepared  for 
it,  nay,  hastened,  by  the  speculative  ideas  about  the 


The  Logos  219 

Messiah  propounded  by  Paul  and  other  ancient 
teachers?  The  knowledge  that  the  divine  in  Christ 
must  be  conceived  as  the  Logos  opened  up  a  num- 
ber of  problems,  and  at  the  same  time  set  them 
definite  limits  and  gave  them  definite  directives. 
Christ's  unique  character  as  opposed  to  all  rivals 
appeared  to  be  established  in  the  simplest  fashion, 
and  yet  the  conception  provided  thought  with  so 
much  liberty  and  free  play  that  Christ  could  be  re- 
garded, as  the  need  might  arise,  on  the  one  side  as 
operative  deity  itself,  and  on  the  other  as  still  the 
first-born  among  many  brethren  and  as  the  first 
created  of  God. 

What  a  proof  it  is  of  the  impression  which 
Christ's  teaching  created  that  Greek  philosophers 
managed  to  identify  him  with  the  Logos!  For  the 
assertion  that  the  incarnation  of  the  Logos  had 
taken  place  in  an  historical  personage  there  had  been 
no  preparation.  No  philosophising  Jew  had  ever 
thought  of  identifying  the  Messiah  with  the  Logos; 
no  Philo,  for  instance,  ever  entertained  the  idea  of 
such  an  equation  !  //  gave  a  metaphysical  signific- 
ance to  an  historical  fact ;  it  dreiv  into  the  domain 
of  cosmology  and  religious  philosophy  a  person  wlio 
had  appeared  in  time  and  space ;  but  by  so  distin- 
guishing one  person  it  raised  all  history  to  the  plane 
of  the  cosmical  movement. 

The  identification  of  the  Logos  with  Christ  was 


2  20  What  is  Christianity? 

the  determining  factor  in  the  fusion  of  Greek  philo- 
sophy with  the  apostolic  inheritance  and  led  the 
more  thoughtful  Greeks  to  adopt  the  latter.  Most 
of  us  regard  this  identification  as  inadmissible,  be- 
cause the  way  in  which  we  conceive  the  world  and 
ethics  does  not  point  to  the  existence  of  any  Logos 
at  all.  But  a  man  must  be  blind  not  to  see  that  for 
that  age  the  appropriate  formula  for  uniting  the 
Christian  religion  with  Greek  thought  was  the 
Logos.  Nor  is  it  difficult  even  to-day  to  attach  a 
valid  meaning  to  the  conception.  An  unmixed 
blessing  it  has  not  been.  To  a  much  larger  extent 
than  the  earlier  speculative  ideas  about  Christ  it 
absorbed  men's  interest;  it  withdrew  their  minds 
from  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel,  and  increasingly 
transformed  it  into  a  philosophy  of  religion.  The 
proposition  that  the  Logos  had  appeared  among 
men  had  an  intoxicating  effect,  but  the  enthusiasm 
and  transport  which  it  produced  in  the  soul  did  not 
lead  with  any  certainty  to  the  God  whom  Jesus 
Christ  proclaimed. 

The  loss  of  an  original  element  and  the  gain  of  a 
fresh  one,  namely,  the  Greek,  are  insufficient  to  ex- 
plain the  great  change  which  the  Christian  religion 
experienced  in  the  second  century.  We  must  bear 
in  mind,  thirdly,  the  great  struggle  which  that  re- 
ligion was  then  carrying  on  within  its  own  domain. 
Parallel   with  the   slow    influx    of   the  element    of 


Catholicism  221 

Greek  philosophy,  experiments  were  being  made  all 
along  the  line  in  the  direction  of  what  may  be 
briefly  called  "  acute  Hellenisation."  While  they 
offer  us  a  most  magnificent  historical  spectacle,  in 
the  period  itself  they  were  a  terrible  danger.  More 
than  .  any  before  it,  the  second  century  is  the 
century  of  religious  fusion,  of  **  Theocrasia. "  The 
problem  was  to  include  Christianity  in  this  religious 
fusion,  as  one  element  among  others,  although  the 
chief.  The  **  Hellenism  "  which  made  this  endeav- 
our had  already  attracted  to  itself  all  the  mysteries, 
all  the  philosophy  of  Eastern  worship,  elements  the 
most  sublime  and  the  most  absurd,  and  by  the 
never-failing  aid  of  philosophical,  that  is  to  say,  of 
allegorical  interpretation,  had  spun  them  all  into  a 
glittering  web.  It  now  fell  upon — I  cannot  help  so 
expressing  it — the  Christian  religion.  It  was  im- 
pressed by  the  sublime  character  of  this  religion ;  it 
did  reverence  to  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Saviour  of  the 
world ;  it  offered  to  give  up  everything  that  it  pos- 
sessed— all  the  treasures  of  its  civilisation  and  its 
wisdom — to  this  message,  if  only  the  message  would 
suffer  them  to  stand.  As  though  endowed  with  the 
right  to  rule,  the  message  was  to  make  its  entry 
into  a  ready-made  theory  of  the  world  and  religion, 
and  into  mysteries  already  prepared  for  it.  What  a 
proof  of  the  impression  which  this  message  made, 
and  what  a  temptation !    This  "  Gnosticism," — such 


222  What  is  Christianity? 

is  the  name  which  the  movement  has  received, — 
strong  and  active  in  the  plenitude  of  its  religious 
experiments,  established  itself  under  Christ's  name, 
developed  a  vigorous  and  abiding  feeling  for  many 
Christian  ideas,  sought  to  give  shape  to  what  was 
still  shapeless,  to  settle  accounts  with  what  was  ex- 
ternally incomplete,  and  to  bring  the  whole  stream 
of  the  Christian  movement  into  its  own  channel. 
The  majority  of  the  faithful,  led  by  their  bishops, 
so  far  from  yielding  to  these  enticements,  took  up 
the  struggle  with  them  in  the  conviction  that  they 
masked  a  demonic  temptation.  But  struggle  in 
this  case  meant  definition,  that  is  to  say,  drawing  a 
sharp  line  of  demarcation  around  what  was  Christ- 
ian and  declaring  everything  heathen  that  would 
not  keep  within  it.  The  struggle  with  Gnosticism 
compelled  the  Church  to  put  its  teachings  its  worships 
and  its  discipline  into  fixed  form,s  and  ordinances, 
and  to  exclude  everyone  who  would  not  yield  them 
obedience.  In  the  conviction  that  it  was  everywhere 
only  conserving  and  honouring  what  had  been 
handed  down,  it  never  for  a  moment  doubted  that 
the  obedience  which  it  demanded  was  anything 
more  than  subjection  to  the  divine  will  itself,  and 
that  in  the  doctrines  with  which  it  encountered  the 
enemy  it  was  exhibiting  the  impress  of  religion  itself. 
If  by  **  Catholic  "  we  mean  the  church  of  doc- 
trine and  of  law,  then  the  Catholic  Church  had  its 


Catholicism  223 

origin  in  the  struggle  with  Gnosticism.  It  had  to 
pay  a  heavy  price  for  the  victory  which  kept  that 
tendency  at  bay ;  we  may  almost  say  that  the  van- 
quished imposed  their  terms  upon  the  victor :  Victi 
victoribus  legem  dederurit.  It  kept  Dualism  and  the 
acute  phase  of  Hellenism  at  bay ;  but  by  becoming  a 
community  with  a  fully  worked-out  scheme  of  doc- 
trine, and  a  definite  form  of  public  worship,  it  was 
of  necessity  compelled  to  take  on  forms  analogous 
to  those  which  it  combated  in  the  Gnostics.  To 
encounter  our  enemy's  theses  by  setting  up  others 
one  by  one  is  to  change  over  to  his  ground.  How 
much  of  its  original  freedom  the  Church  sacrificed  I 
It  was  now  forced  to  say:  You  are  no  Christian, 
you  cannot  come  into  any  relation  with  God  at  all, 
unless  you  have  first  of  all  acknowledged  these  doc- 
trines, yielded  obedience  to  these  ordinances,  and 
followed  out  definite  forms  of  mediation.  Nor  was 
anyone  to  think  a  religious  experience  legitimate 
that  had  not  been  sanctioned  by  sound  doctrine  and 
approved  by  the  priests.  The  Church  found  no 
other  way  and  no  other  means  of  maintaining  itself 
against  Gnosticism,  and  what  was  set  up  as  a  pro- 
tection against  enemies  from  without  became  the 
palladium,  nay,  the  very  foundation,  within.  This 
entire  development,  it  is  true,  would  probably  have 
taken  place  apart  from  the  struggle  in  question, — 
the  two  elements  which  we  first  discussed  would 


2  24  What  is  Christianity? 

have  produced  it  ;  but  that  it  took  place  so  rapidly 
and  assumed  so  positive,  nay,  so  Draconian,  a 
shape,  was  due  to  the  fact  that  the  struggle  was 
one  in  which  the  very  existence  of  the  traditional 
religion  was  at  stake.  The  superficial  view  that  the 
personal  ambition  of  certain  individuals  was  at  the 
bottom  of  the  whole  system  of  established  ordin- 
ance and  priesthood  is  absolutely  untenable.  The 
loss  of  the  original,  living  element  is  by  itself  sufifi- 
cient  to  explain  the  phenomena.  La  mediocrite 
fonde  r autorite.  It  is  the  man  who  knows  religion 
only  as  usage  and  obedience  that  creates  the  priest, 
for  the  purpose  of  ridding  himself  of  an  essential 
part  of  the  obligations  which  he  feels  by  loading  him 
with  them.  He  also  makes  ordinances,  for  the 
semi-religious  prefer  an  ordinance  to  a  Gospel. 

We  have  endeavoured  to  indicate  the  tendencies 
by  which  the  great  change  was  effected.  It  re- 
mains to  answer  the  second  question :  Did  the 
Gospel  hold  its  own  amid  the  change,  and,  if  so, 
how  ?  That  it  entered  upon  an  entirely  new  set  of 
circumstances  is  already  obvious ;  but  we  shall  have 
to  study  them  more  closely. 


LECTURE   XII 

NO  one  can  compare  the  internal  state  of  Christ- 
endom at  the  beginning  of  the  third  century 
with  the  state  in  which  it  found  itself  a  hundred  and 
twenty  years  earlier  without  being  moved  by  con- 
flicting views  and  sentiments.  Admiration  for  the 
vigorous  achievement  presented  in  the  creation  of 
the  Catholic  Church,  and  for  the  energy  with  which 
it  extended  its  activity  in  all  directions,  is  balanced 
by  concern  at  the  absence  of  those  many  elements 
of  freedom  and  directness,  united,  however,  by  an 
inward  bond,  which  the  primitive  age  possessed. 
Although  we  are  compelled  gratefully  to  acknow- 
ledge that  this  Church  repelled  all  attempts  to  let 
the  Christian  religion  simply  dissolve  into  contem- 
porary thought,  and  protected  itself  against  the  acute 
phase  of  Hellenisation,  still  we  cannot  shut  our  eyes 
to  the  fact  that  it  had  to  pay  a  high  price  for  main- 
taining its  position.  Let  us  determine  a  little  more 
precisely  what  the  alteration  was  which  was  effected 
in  it,  and  on  which  we  have  already  touched. 

The  first  and  most  prominent  change  is  the  way 
in  which  freedom  and  independence  in  matters  of 
^^  225 


226  What  is  Christianity? 

religion  are  endangered.  No  one  is  to  feel  and  count 
himself  a  Christian,  that  is  to  say,  a  child  of  God, 
who  has  not  previously  subjected  his  religious 
knowledge  and  experience  to  the  controlling  influ- 
ence of  the  Church's  creed.  The  "  Spirit  "  is  con- 
fined within  the  narrowest  limits,  and  forbidden  to 
work  where  and  as  it  will.  Nay,  more ;  not  only  is 
the  individual,  except  in  special  cases,  to  begin  by 
being  a  minor  and  by  obeying  the  Church ;  he  is 
never  to  become  of  full  age,  that  is  to  say,  he  is 
never  to  lose  his  dependence  on  doctrine,  on  the 
priest,  on  public  worship,  and  on  the  ''  book."  It 
was  then  that  what  we  still  specifically  call  the 
Catholic  form  of  godliness,  in  contrast  with  Evan- 
gelicalism, originated.  A  blow  was  dealt  to  the  di- 
rect and  immediate  element  in  religion;  and  for 
any  individual  to  restore  it  afresh  for  himself  be- 
came a  matter  of  extraordinary  difficulty. 

Secondly,  although  the  acute  phase  of  Hellenisa- 
tion  was  avoided,  Christendom  became  more  and 
more  penetrated  by  the  Greek  and  philosophical 
idea  that  true  religion  is  first  and  foremost  '*  doc- 
trine," and  doctrine,  too,  that  is  coextensive  with 
the  whole  range  of  knowledge.  That  this  faith  of 
"slaves  and  old  women"  attracted  to  itself  the 
entire  philosophy  of  God  and  the  world  which  the 
Greeks  had  formed,  and  undertook  to  recast  that 
philosophy  as  though  teaching  it  were  part  of  its 


Cathoiicism  227 

own  substance  and  unite  it  with  the  teaching  of 
Jesus  Christ,  was  certainly  a  proof  of  the  inner 
power  of  the  Christian  religion ;  but  the  process  in- 
volved, as  a  necessary  consequence,  a  displacement 
of  the  fundamental  religious  interest,  and  the  ad- 
dition of  an  enormous  burden.  The  question, 
**  What  must  I  do  to  be  saved  ?  "  which  in  Jesus 
Christ's  and  the  apostles'  day  could  still  receive  a 
very  brief  answer,  now  evoked  a  most  diffuse  one ; 
and  even  though  in  view  of  the  laymen  shorter  re- 
plies might  still  be  provided,  the  laymen  were  in  so 
far  regarded  as  imperfect,  and  expected  to  observe 
a  submissive  attitude  towards  the  learned.  The 
Christian  religion  had  already  received  that  tend- 
ency to  Intellectualism  which  has  clung  to  it  ever 
since.  But  when  thus  presented  as  a  huge  and  com- 
plex fabric,  as  a  vast  and  difficult  system  of  doc- 
trine, not  only  is  it  encumbered,  but  its  earnest 
character  threatens  to  disappear.  This  character 
depends  upon  the  emotional  and  gladdening  ele- 
ment in  it  being  kept  directly  accessible.  The  Christ- 
ian religion  is  assuredly  informed  with  the  desire 
to  come  to  terms  with  all  knowledge  and  with  in- 
tellectual life  as  a  whole ;  but  when  achievements  in 
this  field — even  presuming  that  they  always  accord 
with  truth  and  reality— are  held  to  be  equally  bind- 
ing with  the  evangelical  message,  or  even  to  be  a 
necessary  preliminary   to   it,    mischief   is   done  to 


228  What  is  Christianity  ? 

the  cause  of  religion.  This  mischief  is  already  un- 
mistakably present  at  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century. 

Thirdly,  the  Church  obtained  a  special,  independ- 
ent value  as  an  institution;  it  became  a  religious 
power.  Originally  only  a  developed  form  of  that 
community  of  brothers  which  furnished  place  and 
manner  for  God's  common  worship  and  a  mysteri- 
ous shadow  of  the  heavenly  Church,  it  now  became, 
as  an  institution,  an  indispensable  factor  in  religion. 
People  were  taught  that  in  this  institution  Christ's 
Spirit  had  deposited  everything  that  the  individual 
man  can  need ;  that  he  is  wholly  bound  to  it,  there- 
fore, not  only  in  love  but  also  in  faith;  that  it  is 
there  only  that  the  Spirit  works,  and  therefore  there 
only  that  all  its  gifts  of  grace  are  to  be  found. 
That  the  individual  Christian  who  did  not  sub- 
ordinate himself  to  the  ecclesiastical  institution  re- 
lapsed, as  a  rule,  into  heathenism,  and  fell  into  false 
and  evil  doctrines  or  an  immoral  life,  was,  indeed, 
an  actual  fact.  The  effect  of  this,  combined  with 
the  struggle  against  the  Gnostics,  was  that  the  in- 
stitution, together  with  all  its  forms  and  arrange- 
ments, became  more  and  more  identified  with  the 
"  bride  of  Christ,"  **  the  true  Jerusalem,"  and  so  on, 
and  accordingly  was  even  itself  proclaimed  as  the 
inviolable  creation  of  God,  and  the  fixed  and  un- 
alterable abode  of  the   Holy  Ghost.      Consistently 


Catholicism  229 

with  this,  it  began  to  announce  that  all  its  ordin- 
ances were  equally  sacred.  How  greatly  religious 
liberty  was  thus  encumbered  I  need  not  show. 

Fourthly  and  lastly,  the  Gospel  was  not  pro- 
claimed as  the  glad  message  with  the  same  vigour 
in  the  second  century  as  it  had  been  in  the  first. 
The  reasons  for  this  are  manifold :  on  the  one  hand 
personal  experience  of  religion  was  not  felt  so 
strongly  as  Paul,  or  as  the  author  of  the  fourth 
Gospel,  felt  it ;  on  the  other,  the  prevalent  eschato- 
logical  expectations,  which  those  teachers  had  re- 
strained by  their  more  profound  teaching,  remained 
in  full  sway.  Fear  and  hope  are  more  prominent  in 
the  Christianity  of  the  second  century  than  they  are 
with  Paul,  and  it  is  only  in  appearance  that  the 
former  stands  near  to  Jesus'  sayings;  for,  as  we 
saw,  God's  Fatherhood  is  the  main  article  in  Jesus' 
message.  But,  as  Romans  viii.  proves,  the  know- 
ledge of  this  truth  is  just  what  Paul  embodied  in  his 
preaching  of  the  faith.  While  the  element  oi  fear 
thus  obtained  a  larger  scope  in  the  Christianity  of 
the  second  century, — this  scope  increased  in  propor- 
tion as  the  original  buoyancy  died  down  and  con- 
formity to  the  world  extended, — the  ethical  element 
became  less  free  and  more  a  matter  of  law  and 
rigorism.  In  religion,  rigorism  always  forms  the 
obverse  side  of  secularity.  But  as  it  appeared  im- 
possible to  expect  a  rigoristic  ethics  of  everyone^  ^ 


230  What  is  Christianity? 

the  distinction  between  a  perfect  and  a  sufficient 
morality  already  set  in  as  an  element  in  the  growth 
of  Catholicism.  That  the  roots  of  this  distinction 
go  further  back  is  a  fact  of  which  we  need  not  here 
take  account ;  it  was  only  towards  the  end  of  the 
second  century  that  the  distinction  became  a  fatal 
one.  Born  of  necessity  and  erected  into  a  virtue, 
it  soon  grew  so  important  that  the  existence  of 
Christianity  as  a  Catholic  Church  came  to  depend 
upon  it.  The  uniformity  of  the  Christian  ideal  was 
thereby  disturbed  and  a  quantitative  view  of  moral 
achievement  suggested  which  is  unknown  to  the 
Gospel.  The  Gospel  does,  no  doubt,  make  a  dis- 
tinction between  a  strong  and  a  weak  faith,  and 
greater  and  smaller  moral  achievements;  but  he 
that  is  least  in  the  kingdom  of  God  may  be  perfect 
in  his  kind. 

These  various  tendencies  together  denote  the 
essential  changes  which  the  Christian  religion  ex- 
perienced up  to  the  beginning  of  the  third  century, 
and  by  which  it  was  modified.  Did  the  Gospel 
hold  its  own  in  spite  of  them,  and  how  may  that  be 
shown  ?  Well,  we  can  cite  a  whole  series  of  docu- 
ments, which,  so  far  as  written  words  can  attest 
inner  and  genuinely  Christian  life,  bear  very  clear 
and  impressive  testimony  that  such  life  existed. 
Martyrdoms  like  those  of  Perpetua  and  Felicitas, 
or  letters  passing  between  communities,  like  those 


Catholicism  231 

from  Lyons  to  Asia  Minor,  exhibit  the  Christian 
faith  and  the  strength  and  delicacy  of  moral  sentim- 
ent with  a  splendour  only  paralleled  in  the  days 
when  the  faith  was  founded ;  while  of  all  that  had 
been  done  in  the  external  development  of  the  Church 
they  make  no  mention  whatever.  The  way  to  God 
is  found  with  certainty,  and  the  simplicity  of  the 
life  within  does  not  appear  to  be  disturbed  or  en- 
cumbered. Again,  let  us  take  a  writer  like  the 
Christian  religious  philosopher,  Clement  of  Alex- 
andria, who  flourished  about  the  year  200.  We  can 
still  feel  from  his  writings  that  this  scholar,  although 
he  was  absolutely  steeped  in  speculative  ideas,  and 
as  a  thinker  reduced  the  Christian  religion  to  a 
boundless  sea  of  "  doctrines," — a  Greek  in  every 
fibre  of  his  being, — won  peace  and  joy  from  the 
Gospel,  and  he  can  also  express  what  he  won  and 
testify  of  the  power  of  the  living  God.  It  is  as  a 
new  man  that  he  appears,  one  who  has  pressed  on 
through  the  whole  range  of  philosophy,  through 
authority  and  speculation,  through  all  the  externals 
of  religion,  to  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of 
God.  His  faith  in  Providence,  his  faith  in  Christ, 
his  doctrine  of  freedom,  his  ethics — everything  is 
expressed  in  language  that  betrays  the  Greek,  and 
yet  everything  is  new  and  genuinely  Christian. 
Further,  if  we  compare  him  with  a  Christian  of 
quite   another   stamp,    namely,  his  contemporary, 


232  What  is  Christianity  ? 

TertuUian,  it  is  easy  to  show  that  what  they  have  in 
common  in  religion  is  what  they  have  learned  from 
the  Gospel,  nay,  is  the  Gospel  itself.  And  in  read- 
ing Tertullian's  exposition  of  the  Lord's  Prayer, 
and  turning  it  over  in  our  minds,  we  see  that  this 
hot-blooded  African,  this  stern  foe  of  heretics,  this 
resolute  champion  of  atictoritas  and  ratioy  this  dog- 
matic advocate,  this  man  at  once  Churchman  and 
enthusiast,  nevertheless  possessed  a  deep  feeling  for 
the  main  substance  of  the  Gospel  and  a  good 
knowledge  of  it  as  well.  In  this  Old-Catholic 
Church  the  Gospel,  truly,  was  not  as  yet  stifled! 

Further,  this  Church  still  kept  up  the  all-import- 
ant idea  that  the  Christian  community  must  present 
itself  as  a  society  of  brothers  active  in  work,  and  it 
gave  expression  to  this  idea  in  a  way  that  puts  sub- 
sequent generations  to  shame. 

Lastly,  there  can  be  no  doubt — and  while  so  truth- 
loving  a  man  as  Origen  confirms  the  fact  for  us, 
heathen  writers  like  Lucian  also  attest  it — that  the 
hope  of  an  eternal  life,  the  full  confidence  in  Christ, 
a  readiness  to  make  sacrifices,  and  a  purity  of  morals 
were  still,  in  spite  of  all  frailties — here,  too,  not  lack- 
ing,— the  real  characteristics  of  this  society.  Origen 
can  challenge  his  heathen  opponents  to  compare 
any  community  whatever  with  the  Christian  com- 
munity, and  to  say  where  the  greater  moral  excel- 
lence lies.      This  religion   had,   no   doubt,  already 


Greek  Catholicism  233 

developed  a  husk  and  integument;  to  penetrate 
through  to  it  and  grasp  the  kernel  had  become  more 
difficult;  it  had  also  lost  much  of  its  original  life. 
But  the  gifts  and  the  tasks  which  the  Gospel  offered 
still  remained  in  force,  and  the  fabric  which  the 
Church  had  erected  around  them  also  served  many 
a  man  as  the  means  by  which  he  attained  to  the 
thing  itself. 

We  now  pass  to  the  consideration  of 

THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION  IN  GREEK  CATHOLICISM 

I  must  invite  you  to  descend  several  centuries 
with  me  and  to  look  at  the  Greek  Church  as  it  is  to- 
day, and  as  it  has  been  preserved,  essentially  unal- 
tered, for  more  than  a  thousand  years.  Between  the 
third  and  the  nineteenth  century  the  history  of  the 
Church  of  the  East  nowhere  presents  any  deep  gulf. 
Hence  we  may  take  up  our  position  in  the  present. 
Here,  in  turn,  we  ask  the  three  following  questions: 

What  did  this  Greek  Catholicism  achieve  ? 

What  are  its  characteristics  ? 

What  modifications  did  the  Gospel  here  undergo, 
and  how  did  it  hold  its  own  ? 

What  did  this  Greek  Catholicism  achieve  ?  Two 
facts  may  be  cited  on  this  point:  firstly,  in  the  great 
domain  which  it  embraces,  the  countries  of  the  east- 
ern part  of  the  Mediterranean  and  northwards  to  the 
Arctic  Ocean,  it  made  an  end  of  heathenism  and 


234  What  is  Christianity  ? 

polytheism.  The  decisive  victory  was  accomplished 
from  the  third  to  the  sixth  century,  and  so  effect- 
ually accomplished  that  the  gods  of  Greece  really 
perished — perished  unwept  and  unmourned.  Not 
in  any  great  battle  did  they  die,  but  from  sheer  ex- 
haustion, and  without  offering  any  resistance  worth 
mention.  I  may  just  point  out  that  before  dying 
they  transferred  a  considerable  portion  of  their 
power  to  the  Church's  saints.  But,  what  is  more 
important,  with  the  death  of  the  gods  Neoplaton- 
ism,  the  last  great  product  of  Greek  philosophy,  was 
also  vanquished.  The  religious  philosophy  of  the 
Church  proved  the  stronger.  The  victory  over  Hel- 
lenism is  an  achievement  of  the  Eastern  Church  on 
which  it  still  subsists.  Secondly,  this  Church  man- 
aged to  effect  such  a  fusion  with  the  individual  na- 
tions which  it  drew  into  its  bosom  that  religion  and 
church  became  to  them  national  palladia,  nay,  pal- 
ladia pure  and  simple.  Go  amongst  Greeks,  Rus- 
sians, Armenians,  etc.,  and  you  will  everywhere  find 
that  religion  and  nationality  are  inseparable,  and 
the  one  element  exists  only  in  and  alongside  of  the 
other.  Men  of  these  nationalities  will,  if  need  be, 
suffer  themselves  to  be  cut  in  pieces  for  their  religion. 
This  is  no  mere  consequence  of  the  pressure  exer- 
cised by  the  hostile  power  of  Mohammedanism  ;  the 
Russians  are  not  subject  to  this  pressure.  Nor  is  it 
only — shall  I  say  ? — in  the  Moscow  press  that  we 


Greek  Catholicism  235 

can  see  what  a  firm  and  intimate  connexion  exists 
between  Church  and  nation  in  these  peoples,  in 
spite  of  "  sects,"  which  are  not  wanting  here  either; 
to  convince  ourselves  of  it  we  must  read — to  take 
an  instance  at  random — Tolstoi's  Village  Tales, 
They  bring  before  the  reader  a  really  touching  pic- 
ture of  the  deep  influence  of  the  Church,  with  its 
message  of  the  Eternal,  of  self-sacrifice,  of  sym- 
pathy and  fraternity,  on  the  national  mind.  That 
the  clergy  stand  low  in  the  social  scale,  and  fre- 
quently encounter  contempt,  must  not  delude  us 
into  supposing  that  as  the  representatives  of  the 
Church  they  do  not  occupy  an  incomparably  high 
station.  In  Eastern  Europe  the  monastic  ideal  is 
deeply  rooted  in  the  national  soul. 

But  the  mention  of  these  two  points  includes 
everything  that  can  be  said  about  the  achievements 
of  this  Church.  To  add  that  it  has  disseminated  a 
certain  amount  of  culture  would  involve  pitching 
our  standard  of  culture  very  low.  In  comparison 
with  Islam,  too,  it  is  no  longer  so  successful  in  do- 
ing what  it  has  done  in  the  past  and  still  does  in  re- 
gard to  polytheism.  The  missions  of  the  Russian 
Church  are  still  overthrowing  polytheism  even  to- 
day; but  large  territories  have  been  lost  to  Islam, 
and  the  Church  has  not  recovered  them.  Islam  has 
extended  its  victories  as  far  as  the  Adriatic  and  in 
the  direction  of  Bosnia.     It  has  won  over  numerous 


236  What  is  Christianity  ? 

Albanian  and  Slav  tribes  which  were  once  Christian. 
It  shows  itself  to  be  at  least  a  match  for  the  Church, 
although  we  must  not  forget  that  in  the  heart  of  its 
dominions  there  are  Christian  nations  who  have 
maintained  their  creed. 

Our  second  question  was,  What  are  the  character- 
istics of  this  Church  ?  The  answer  is  not  easy ;  for 
as  it  presents  itself  to  the  spectator  this  Church  is  a 
highly  complex  structure.  The  feelings,  the  super- 
stitions, the  learning,  and  the  devotional  philosophy 
of  hundreds,  nay,  of  thousands  of  years,  are  built 
into  it.  But,  further;  no  one  can  look  at  this 
Church  from  outside,  with  its  forms  of  worship,  its 
solemn  ritual,  the  number  of  its  ceremonies,  its 
relics,  pictures,  priests,  monks,  and  the  philosophy 
of  its  mysteries,  and  then  compare  it  on  the  one 
hand  with  the  Church  of  the  first  century,  and  on 
the  other  with  the  Hellenic  cults  in  the  age  of  Neo- 
platonism,  without  arriving  at  the  conclusion  that 
it  belongs  not  to  the  former  but  to  the  latter.  // 
takes  the  form,  not  of  a  Christian  product  in  Greek 
dress y  but  of  a  Greek  product  in  Christian  dress.  It 
would  have  done  battle  with  the  Christians  of  the 
first  century  just  as  it  did  battle  with  the  worship 
of  Magna  Mater  and  Zeus  Soter.  There  are  innum- 
erable features  of  this  Church  which  are  counted  as 
sacred  as  the  Gospel,  and  towards  which  not  even 
a  tendency  existed  in  primitive  Christianity.    Of  the 


Greek  Catholicism  237 

whole  performance  of  the  chief  religious  service, 
nay,  even  of  many  of  the  dogmas,  the  same  thing 
may,  in  the  last  resort,  be  said :  if  certain  words, 
like  **  Christ,"  etc.,  are  omitted,  there  is  nothing  left 
to  recall  the  original  element.  In  its  external  form 
as  a  whole  this  Church  is  nothing  more  than  a  con- 
tinuation of  the  history  of  Greek  religion  under  the 
alien  influence  of  Christianity,  parallel  to  the  many 
other  alien  influences  which  have  affected  it.  We 
might  also  describe  it  as  the  natural  product  of  the 
union  between  Hellenism,  itself  already  in  a  state  of 
oriental  decay,  and  Christian  teaching;  it  is  the 
transformation  which  history  effects  in  a  religion  by 
"  natural"  means,  and,  as  was  here  the  case,  was 
bound  to  effect  between  the  third  and  the  sixth 
century.  In  this  sense  it  is  a  natural  religion.  The 
conception  admits  of  a  double  meaning.  It  is  gen- 
erally understood  as  an  abstract  term  covering  all 
the  elementary  feelings  and  processes  traceable  in 
every  religion.  Whether  there  are  any  such  ele- 
ments, or,  on  the  other  hand,  whether  they  are 
sufficiently  stable  and  articulate  to  be  followed  as  a 
whole,  admits,  however,  of  a  doubt.  The  concep- 
tion "  natural  religion  "  may  be  better  applied  to 
the  growth  which  a  religion  produces  when  the 
natural  "  forces  of  history  have  ceased  playing  on 
it.  At  bottom  these  forces  are  everywhere  the 
same,  although  differing  in  the  way  in  which  they 


238  What  is  Christianity  ? 

are  mounted.  They  mould  religion  until  it  answers 
their  purpose;  not  by  expelling  what  is  sacred, 
venerable,  and  so  on,  but  by  assigning  it  the  place 
and  allowing  it  the  scope  which  they  consider  right. 
They  immerse  everything  in  a  uniform  medium, — 
that  medium  which,  like  the  air,  is  the  first  condi- 
tion of  their  "  natural"  existence.  In  this  sense, 
then,  the  Greek  Church  is  a  natural  religion ;  no 
prophet,  no  reformer,  no  genius,  has  arisen  in  its 
history  since  the  third  century  to  disturb  the  ordin- 
ary process  by  which  a  religion  becomes  naturalised 
into  common  history.  The  process  attained  its 
completion  in  the  sixth  century  and  asserted  itself 
victoriously  against  severe  assaults  in  the  eighth  and 
ninth.  The  Church  has  since  been  at  rest,  and  no 
further  essential,  nay,  not  even  any  unessential, 
change  has  taken  place  in  the  condition  which  it 
then  reached.  Since  then,  apparently,  the  nations 
belonging  to  this  Church  have  undergone  nothing  to 
make  it  seem  intolerable  to  them  and  to  call  for  any 
reform  in  it.  They  still  continue,  then,  in  this 
"  natural "  religion  of  the  sixth  century. 

I  have,  however,  advisedly  spoken  of  the  Church 
in  its  external  form.  Its  complex  character  is  partly 
due  to  the  fact  that  we  cannot  arrive  at  its  inner 
condition  by  simple  deduction  from  its  outer.  It  is 
not  sufBcient  to  observe,  although  the  observation 
is  correct,  that  this  Church  is  part  of  the  history  of 


Greek  Catholicism  239 

Greek  religion.  It  exercises  influences  which  from 
this  point  of  view  are  not  easily  intelligible.  We 
cannot  form  a  correct  estimate  of  it  unless  we 
dwell  more  closely  on  the  factors  which  lend  it  its 
character. 

The  first  factor  which  we  encounter  is  tradition, 
and  the  observance  of  it.  The  sacred  and  the  di- 
vine do  not  exist  in  free  action, — we  shall  see  later 
to  what  reservations  this  statement  is  subject, — but 
are  put,  as  it  were,  into  a  storehouse,  in  the  form  of 
an  immense  capital.  The  capital  is  to  provide  for 
all  demands,  and  to  be  coined  in  the  precise  way  in 
which  the  Fathers  coined  it.  Here,  it  is  true,  we 
have  an  idea  which  can  be  traced  to  something  al- 
ready existing  in  the  primitive  age.  We  read  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles  that  **  they  continued  stead- 
fastly in  the  apostles'  doctrine."  But  what  became 
of  this  practice  and  this  obligation  ?  Firstly,  every- 
thing was  designated  "apostolic"  which  was  de- 
posited in  this  Church  in  the  course  of  the 
succeeding  centuries;  or,  rather,  what  the  Church 
considered  necessary  to  possess  in  order  to  suit  the 
historical  position  in  which  it  was  placed  it  called 
apostolic,  because  it  fancied  that  otherwise  it  could 
not  exist,  and  what  is  necessary  for  the  Church's  ex- 
istence must  be  simply  apostolic.  Secondly,  it  has 
been  established  as  an  irrefragable  fact  that  the 
**  continuing  steadfastly  in  the  apostles'  doctrine  " 


240  What  is  Christianity  ? 

applies,  first  and  foremost,  to  the  punctilious  observ- 
ance of  every  direction  as  to  ritual :  the  sacred  ele- 
ment is  bound  up  with  text  diud  form.  Both  are 
conceived  in  a  thoroughly  antique  way.  That  the 
divine  is,  so  to  speak,  stored  up  as  though  it  were 
an  actual  commodity,  and  that  the  supreme  demand 
which  the  Deity  makes  is  the  punctilious  observance 
of  a  ritual,  were  ideas  that  in  antiquity  were  per- 
fectly familiar  and  admitted  of  no  doubt.  Tradi- 
tion and  ceremony  are  the  conditions  under  which 
the  Holy  alone  existed  and  was  accessible.  Obedi- 
ence, respect,  reverence,  were  the  most  important 
religious  feelings.  Whilst  they  are  doubtless  in- 
alienable features  of  religion,  it  is  only  as  accom- 
paniments of  an  active  feeling  quite  different  in  its 
character  that  they  possess  any  value,  and  that 
further  presumes  that  the  object  to  which  they  are 
directed  is  a  worthy  one.  Traditionalism  and  the 
ritualism  so  closely  connected  with  it  are  prominent 
characteristics  of  the  Greek  Church,  but  this  is  just 
what  shows  how  far  it  has  departed  from  the  Gospel. 
The  second  point  that  fixes  the  character  of  this 
Church  is  the  value  which  it  attaches  to  orthodoxy ^ 
to  sound  doctrine.  It  has  stated  and  re-stated  its 
doctrines  with  the  greatest  precision  and  often 
enough  made  them  a  terror  to  men  of  different 
creed.  No  one,  it  claims,  can  be  saved  who  does 
not  possess  the  correct  doctrine ;  the  man  who  does 


Greek  Catholicism  241 

not  possess  it  is  to  be  expelled  and  must  forfeit  all 
his  rights;  if  he  be  a  fellow-countryman,  he  must  be 
treated  as  a  leper  and  lose  all  connexion  with  his 
nation.  This  fanaticism,  which  still  flares  up  here 
and  there  in  the  Greek  Church  even  to-day,  and  in 
principle  has  not  been  abandoned,  is  not  Greek,  al- 
though a  certain  inclination  towards  it  was  not  lack- 
ing in  the  ancient  Greeks ;  still  less  did  it  originate 
in  Roman  law;  it  is  the  result,  rather,  of  an  unfor- 
tunate combination  of  several  factors.  When  the 
Roman  Empire  became  Christian,  the  hard  fight  for 
existence  which  the  Church  had  waged  with  the 
Gnostics  was  not  yet  forgotten ;  still  less  had  the 
Church  forgotten  the  last  bloody  persecutions  v/hich 
the  State  had  inflicted  upon  it  in  a  kind  of  despair. 
These  two  circumstances  would  in  themselves  be 
sufficient  to  explain  how  the  Church  came  to  feel 
that  it  had  a  right  of  reprisal,  and  was  at  the  same 
time  bound  to  suppress  heretics.  But,  in  addition, 
there  had  now  appeared  in  the  highest  place,  since 
the  days  of  Diocletian  and  Constantine,  the  absolut- 
ist conception,  derived  from  the  East,  of  the  un- 
Hmited  right  and  the  unlimited  duty  of  the  ruler  in 
regard  to  his  "subjects."  The  unfortunate  factor 
in  the  great  change  was  that  the  Roman  Emperor 
was  at  once,  and  almost  in  the  same  moment,  a 
Christian    emperor  and  an    Oriental    despot.     The 

more  conscientious  he  was,  the  more  intolerant  he 
16 


242  What  is  Christianity  ? 

was  bound  to  be;  for  the  Deity  had  committed  to 
his  care  not  only  men's  bodies  but  their  souls  as 
well.  Thus  arose  the  aggressive  and  all-devouring 
orthodoxy  of  State  and  Church,  or,  rather,  of  the 
State-Church.  Examples  which  were  to  hand  from 
the  Old  Testament  completed  and  sanctified  the 
process. 

Intolerance  is  a  new  growth  in  the  land  of  the 
Greeks  and  cannot  be  roundly  laid  to  their  charge; 
but  the  way  in  which  doctrine  developed,  namely, 
as  a  philosophy  of  God  and  the  world,  was  due  to 
their  influence;  and  the  fact  that  religion  and  doc- 
trine were  directly  identified  is  also  a  product  of  the 
Greek  spirit.  No  mere  reference  to  the  significance 
which  doctrine  already  possessed  in  the  apostolic 
age,  and  to  the  tendencies  operating  in  the  direc- 
tion of  bringing  it  into  a  speculative  form,  is  suf- 
ficient to  explain  the  change.  These  are  matters,  as 
I  hope  that  I  have  shown  in  the  previous  lectures, 
which  are  rather  to  be  understood  in  a  different 
sense.  It  is  in  the  second  century,  and  with  the 
apologists,  that  Intellectualism  commences;  and, 
supported  by  the  struggle  with  the  Gnostics  and  by 
the  Alexandrian  school  of  religious  philosophers  in 
the  Church,  it  manages  to  prevail. 

But  it  is  not  enough  to  assess  the  teaching  of  the 
Greek  Church  by  its  formal  side  alone,  and  ascertain 
in  what  way  and  to  what  extent  it  is  exhibited,  and 


Greek  Catholicism  243 

what  is  the  value  to  be  placed  upon  it.  We  must 
also  examine  its  substance ;  for  it  possesses  two  ele- 
ments which  are  quite  peculiar  to  it  and  separate  it 
from  the  Greek  philosophy  of  religion — the  idea  of 
the  creation^  and  the  doctrine  of  the  God-Man  iiature 
of  the  Saviour.  We  shall  treat  of  these  two  ele- 
ments in  our  next  lecture,  and,  further,  of  the  two 
other  elements  which,  side  by  side  with  tradition 
and  doctrine,  characterise  the  Greek  Church, 
namely,  the  form  of  worship  and  the  order  of  monk- 
hood. 


LECTURE   XIII 

SO  far  we  have  established  the  fact  that  Greek 
Catholicism  is  characterised  as  a  religion  by 
two  elements :  by  traditionalism  and  by  intellectual- 
ism.  According  to  traditionalism,  the  reverent 
preservation  of  the  received  inheritance,  and  the 
defence  of  it  against  all  innovation,  is  not  only  an 
important  duty,  but  is  itself  the  practical  proof  of 
religion.  That  is  an  idea  quite  in  harmony  with 
antiquity  and  foreign  to  the  Gospel ;  for  the  Gospel 
knows  absolutely  nothing  of  intercourse  with  God 
being  bound  up  with  reverence  for  tradition  itself. 
But  the  second  element,  intellectualism,  is  also  of 
Greek  origin.  The  elaboration  of  the  Gospel  into  a 
vast  philosophy  of  God  and  the  world,  in  which 
every  conceivable  kind  of  material  is  handled ;  the 
conviction  that  because  Christianity  is  the  absolute 
religion  it  must  give  information  on  all  questions  of 
metaphysics,  cosmology,  and  history;  the  view  of 
revelation  as  a  countless  multitude  of  doctrines  and 
explanations,  all  equally  holy  and  important — this 
is  Greek  intellectualism.  According  to  it.  Know- 
ledge is  the  highest  good,  and  spirit  is  spirit  only  in 

244 


Greek  Catholicism  245 

so  far  as  it  knows ;  everything  that  is  of  an  aesthetical, 
ethical,  and  religious  character  must  be  converted 
into  some  form  of  knowledge,  which  human  will 
and  life  will  then  with  certainty  obey.  The  devel- 
opment of  the  Christian  faith  into  an  all-embracing 
theosophy,  and  the  identification  of  faith  with  theo- 
logical knowledge,  are  proofs  that  the  Christian  re- 
ligion on  Greek  soil  entered  the  proscribed  circle  of 
the  native  religious  philosophy  and  has  remained 
there. 

But  in  this  vast  philosophy  of  God  and  the  world, 
which  possesses  an  absolute  value  as  the  "  substance 
of  what  has  been  revealed  "  and  as  *'  orthodox  doc- 
trine," there  are  two  elements  which  radically  dis- 
tinguish it  from  Greek  religious  philosophy  and 
invest  it  with  an  entirely  original  character.  I  do 
not  mean  the  appeal  which  it  makes  to  revelation — 
for  to  that  the  Neoplatonists  also  appealed — but  the 
idea  of  creatiori  and  the  doctrine  of  the  God-Man 
nature  of  the  Saviour.  They  traverse  the  scheme  of 
Greek  religious  philosophy  at  two  critical  points, 
and  have  therefore  always  been  felt  to  be  alien  and 
intolerable  by  its  genuine  representatives. 

The  idea  of  creation  we  can  deal  with  in  a  few 
words.  It  is  undoubtedly  an  element  which  is  as 
important  as  it  is  in  thorough  keeping  with  the  Gos- 
pel. It  abolishes  all  intertwining  of  God  and  world, 
and  gives  expression  to  the  power  and  actuality  of 


246  What  is  Christianity  ? 

the  living  God.  Attempts  were  not  wanting,  it  is 
true,  among  Christian  thinkers  on  Greek  soil — just 
because  they  were  Greeks — to  conceive  the  Deity 
only  as  the  uniform  power  operating  in  the  fabric  of 
the  world,  as  the  unity  in  diversity,  and  as  its  goal. 
Traces  of  this  speculative  idea  are  even  still  to  be 
found  in  the  Church  doctrine ;  the  idea  of  creation, 
however,  triumphed,  and  therewith  Christianity 
won  a  real  victory. 

The  subject  of  the  God-Man  nature  of  the  Saviour 
is  one  on  which  it  is  much  more  difficult  to  arrive  at 
a  correct  opinion.  It  is  indubitably  the  central 
point  in  the  whole  dogmatic  system  of  the  Greek 
Church.  It  supplied  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity. 
In  the  Greek  view  these  two  doctrines  together 
make  up  Christian  teaching  in  nuce.  When  a 
Father  of  the  Greek  Church  once  said,  as  he  did 
say,  "  The  idea  of  the  God-Man  nature,  the  idea  of 
God  becoming  a  man,  is  what  is  new  in  the  new, 
nay,  is  the  only  new  thing  under  the  sun,"  not  only 
did  he  correctly  represent  the  opinion  of  all  his 
fellow-believers,  but  he  also  at  the  same  time  strik- 
ingly expressed  their  view  that,  while  sound  intel- 
ligence and  earnest  reflection  yield  all  the  other 
points  of  doctrine  of  themselves,  this  one  lies  be- 
yond them.  The  theologians  of  the  Greek  Church 
are  convinced  that  the  only  real  distinction  between 
the  Christian  creed  and  natural  philosophy  is  that 


Greek  Catholicism  247 

the  former  embraces  the  doctrine  of  the  God-Man 
nature,  including  the  Trinity.  Side  by  side  with 
this,  the  only  other  doctrine  that  can  at  most  come 
in  question  is  that  of  the  idea  of  creation. 

If  that  be  so,  it  is  of  radical  importance  to  obtain 
a  correct  view  of  the  origin,  meaning,  and  value  of 
this  doctrine.  In  its  completed  form  it  must  look 
strange  to  anyone  who  comes  to  it  straight  from 
the  evangelists.  While  no  historical  reflection  can 
rid  us  of  the  impression  that  the  whole  fabric 
of  ecclesiastical  Christology  is  a  thing  absolutely 
outside  the  concrete  personality  of  Jesus  Christ, 
historical  considerations  nevertheless  enable  us  not 
only  to  explain  its  origin  but  also  even  to  justify, 
in  a  certain  degree,  the  way  in  which  it  is  formul- 
ated. Let  us  try  to  get  a  clear  idea  of  the  leading 
points. 

We  saw  in  a  previous  lecture  how  it  came  about 
that  the  Church  teachers  selected  the  conception  of 
the  Logos  in  order  to  define  Christ's  nature  and 
majesty.  They  found  the  conception  of  the  "  Mes- 
siah "  quite  unintelligible;  it  conveyed  no  meaning 
to  them.  As  conceptions  cannot  be  improvised, 
they  had  to  choose  between  representing  Christ  as 
a  deified  man,  that  is  to  say,  as  a  hero,  or  conceiv- 
ing his  nature  after  the  pattern  of  one  of  the  Greek 
gods,  or  identifying  it  with  the  Logos.  The  first 
two  possibilities  had  to  be  put  aside,  as  they  were 


248  What  is  Christianity  ? 

"heathenish,"  or  seemed  to  be  so.  There  re- 
mained, therefore,  the  Logos.  How  well  this  form- 
ula served  different  purposes  we  have  already 
pointed  out.  Did  it  not  readily  admit  of  being 
combined  with  the  conception  of  the  Sonship,  with- 
out leading  to  any  objectionable  theogonies  ?  It  in- 
volved, too,  no  menace  to  monotheism.  But  the 
formula  had  a  logic  of  its  own,  and  this  logic  led  to 
results  which  were  not  absoluely  free  from  suspicion. 
The  conception  of  the  Logos  was  susceptible  of 
very  varied  expression ;  in  spite  of  its  sublime  mean- 
ing, it  could  be  also  so  conceived  as  to  permit  of  the 
bearer  of  the  title  not  being  by  any  means  of  a  truly 
divine  nature  but  possessing  one  that  was  only  half 
divine. 

The  question  as  to  the  more  exact  definition  of 
the  nature  of  the  Logos-Christ  could  not  have  at- 
tained the  enormous  significance  which  it  received 
in  the  Church,  and  might  have  been  stilled  by  vari- 
ous speculative  answers,  if  it  had  not  been  accom- 
panied by  the  triumph  of  a  very  precise  idea  of  the 
nature  of  redemption,  which  acted  as  a  peremptory 
challenge.  Among  all  the  possible  ideas  on  the 
subject  of  redemption — forgiveness  of  sins,  release 
from  the  power  of  the  demons,  and  so  on — that  idea 
came  victoriously  to  the  front  in  the  Church  in  the 
third  century  which  conceived  of  it  as  redemption 
from  death  and  therewith  as  elevation  to  the  divine 


Greek  Catholicism  249 

///>,  that  is  to  say,  as  deificatioJi.  It  is  true  that  this 
conception  found  a  safe  starting-point  in  the  Gos- 
pel, and  support  in  the  Pauline  theology;  but  in 
the  form  in  which  it  was  now  developed  it  was  for- 
eign to  both  of  them  and  conceived  on  Greek  Hnes ; 
viortality  is  in  itself  reckoned  as  the  greatest  evily 
and  as  the  cause  of  all  evil,  while  the  greatest 
of  blessings  is  to  live  forever.  What  a  severely 
Greek  idea  this  is  we  can  see,  in  the  first 
place,  from  the  fact  that  redemption  from  death 
is  presented,  in  a  wholly  realistic  fashion,  as  a 
pharmacological  process, — the  divine  nature  has  to 
flow  in  and  transform  the  mortal  nature, — and,  in 
the  second,  from  the  way  in  which  eternal  life  and 
deification  were  identified.  But  if  actual  interfer- 
ence in  the  constitution  of  human  nature  and  its 
deification  are  involved,  then  the  Redeemer  mnst  him- 
self be  God  and  must  become  man.  It  is  only  on  this 
condition  that  so  marvellous  a  process  can  be  im- 
agined as  actually  taking  place.  Word,  doctrine, 
individual  deeds,  are  here  of  no  avail — how  can  life 
be  given  to  a  stone,  or  a  mortal  made  immortal,  by 
preaching  at  them  ?  Only  when  the  divine  itself 
bodily  enters  into  mortality  can  mortality  be  trans- 
formed. It  is  not,  however,  the  hero,  but  God 
Himself  alone,  who  possesses  the  divine,  that  is  to 
say,  eternal  life,  and  so  possesses  it  as  to  permit  of 
His  giving  it  to  others.     The  Logos,  then,  must  be 


250  What  is  Christianity  ? 

God  Himself,  and  He  must  have  actually  become 
man.  With  the  satisfying  of  these  two  conditions, 
real,  natural  redemption,  that  is  to  say,  the  deifica- 
tion of  humanity,  is  actually  effected.  These  con- 
siderations enable  us  to  understand  the  prodigious 
disputes  over  the  nature  of  the  Logos-Christ  which 
filled  several  centuries.  They  explain  why  Athana- 
sius  strove  for  the  formula  that  the  l.ogos-Christ 
was  of  the  same  nature  as  the  Father,  as  though  the 
existence  or  non-existence  of  the  Christian  religion 
were  at  stake.  They  show  clearly  how  it  was  that 
other  teachers  in  the  Greek  Church  regarded  any 
menace  to  the  complete  unity  of  the  divine  and  the 
human  in  the  Redeemer,  any  notion  of  a  merely 
moral  connexion,  as  a  death-blow  to  Christianity. 
These  teachers  secured  their  formulas,  which  for 
them  were  anything  but  scholastic  conceptions; 
rather,  they  were  the  statement  and  establishment 
of  a  matter  of  fact,  in  the  absence  of  which  the 
Christian  religion  was  as  unsatisfactory  as  any  other. 
The  doctrines  of  the  identical  nature  of  the  three 
persons  of  the  Trinity  —  how  the  doctrine  of  the 
Holy  Ghost  came  about  I  need  not  mention — and 
of  the  God-Man  nature  of  the  Redeemer  are  in 
strict  accordance  with  the  distinguishing  notion  of 
the  redemption  as  a  deification  of  man's  nature  by 
making  him  immortal.  Without  the  help  of  the  no- 
tion those  formulas  would  never  have  been  attained  ; 


Greek  Catholicism  251 

but  they  also  stand  and  fall  with  it.  They  pre- 
vailed, however,  not  because  they  were  akin  to  the 
ideas  of  Greek  philosophy,  but  because  they  were 
contrasted  with  them.  Greek  philosophy  never 
ventured,  and  never  aspired,  to  meet,  in  any  similar 
way  by  **  history  "  and  speculative  ideas,  that  wish 
for  immortality  which  it  so  vividly  entertained.  To 
attribute  any  such  interference  with  the  Cosmos  to 
an  historical  personality  and  the  manner  in  which  it 
appeared,  and  to  ascribe  to  that  personality  a  trans- 
formation in  what,  given  once  for  all,  was  in  a  state 
of  eternal  flux,  must  necessarily  have  seemed,  to 
Greek  philosophy,  pure  mythology  and  superstition. 
The  "  only  new  thing  under  the  sun"  must  neces- 
sarily have  appeared  to  it,  and  did  appear,  to  be  the 
worst  kind  of  fable. 

The  Greek  Church  still  entertains  the  conviction 
to-day  that  in  these  doctrines  it  possesses  the  es- 
sence of  Christianity,  regarded  at  once  as  a  mystery, 
and  as  a  mystery  that  has  been  revealed.  Criticism 
of  this  contention  is  not  difficult.  We  must  ac- 
knowledge that  those  doctrines  powerfully  con- 
tributed to  keeping  the  Christian  religion  from 
dissolving  into  Greek  religious  philosophy;  further, 
that  they  profoundly  impress  us  with  the  absolute 
character  of  this  religion  ;  again,  that  they  are  in  act- 
ual accordance  with  the  Greek  notion  of  redemp- 
tion; lastly,  that    this   very  notion  has  one   of   its 


252  What  is  Christianity? 

roots  in  the  Gospel.  But  beyond  this  we  can  ac- 
knowledge nothing;  nay,  it  is  to  be  observed:  (i.) 
that  the  notion  of  the  redemption  as  a  deification  of 
mortal  nature  is  subchristian,  because  the  moral  ele- 
ment involved  can  at  best  be  only  tacked  on  to  it ; 
(ii.)  that  the  whole  doctrine  is  inadmissible,  because 
it  hp.s  scarcely  any  connexion  with  the  Jesus  Christ 
of  the  Gospel,  and  its  formulas  do  not  fit  him, — it  is, 
therefore,  not  founded  in  truth;  and  (iii.)  that  as  it 
is  connected  with  the  real  Christ  only  by  uncertain 
threads  it  leads  us  away  from  him, — it  does  not  keep 
his  image  alive,  but,  on  the  contrary,  demands  that 
this  image  should  be  apprehended  solely  in  the  light 
of  alleged  hypotheses  about  him  expressed  in  theo- 
retical propositions.  That  this  substitution  pro- 
duces no  very  serious  or  destructive  effects  is 
principally  owing  to  the  fact  that  in  spite  of  them 
the  Church  has  not  suppressed  the  Gospels,  and 
that  their  own  innate  power  makes  itself  felt.  It 
may  also  be  conceded  that  the  notion  of  God  hav- 
ing become  man  does  not  everywhere  produce  the 
effect  only  of  a  bewildering  mystery,  but,  on  the 
contrary,  is  capable  of  leading  to  the  pure  and  defin- 
ite conviction  that  God  was  in  Christ.  We  may 
admit,  lastly,  that  the  egoistic  desire  for  immortal 
existence  will,  within  the  Christian  sphere,  experi- 
ence a  moral  purification  through  the  longing  to  live 
tvitk  and  in  God,  and  to  remain  inseparably  bound 


Greek  Catholicism  253 

to  His  love.  But  all  these  admissions  cannot  do 
away  with  the  palpable  fact  that  in  Greek  dogma 
we  have  a  fatal  connexion  established  between  the 
desire  of  the  ancients  for  immortal  life  and  the 
Christian  message.  Nor  can  anyone  deny  that  this 
connexion,  implanted  in  Greek  religious  philosophy 
and  the  intellectualism  which  characterised  it,  has 
led  to  formulas  which  are  incorrect,  introduce  a 
supposititious  Christ  in  the  place  of  the  real  one, 
and,  besides,  encourage  the  delusion  that,  if  only  a 
man  possesses  the  right  formula,  he  has  the  thing 
itself.  Even  though  the  Christological  formula  were 
the  theologically  right  one — what  a  departure  from 
the  Gospel  is  involved  in  maintaining  that  a  man 
can  have  no  relation  with  Jesus  Christ,  nay,  that  he 
is  sinning  against  him  and  will  be  cast  out,  unless  he 
first  of  all  acknowledges  that  Christ  was  one  person 
with  two  natures  and  two  powers  of  will,  one  of  them 
divine  and  one  human.  Such  is  the  demand  into 
which  intellectualism  has  developed.  Can  such  a  sys- 
tem still  find  a  place  for  the  Gospel  story  of  the  Sy- 
rophoenician  woman  or  the  centurion  at  Capernaum  ? 

But  with  traditionalism  and  intellectualism  a 
further  element  is  associated,  namely,  ritualism.  If 
religion  is  presented  as  a  complex  system  of  tradi- 
tional doctrine,  to  which  the  few  alone  have  any 
real  access,  the  majority  of  believers  cannot  practise 


254  What  is  Christianity  ? 

it  at  all  except  as  ritual.  Doctrine  comes  to  be  ad- 
ministered in  stereotyped  formulas  accompanied  by 
symbolic  acts.  Although  no  inner  understanding 
of  it  is  thus  possible,  it  produces  the  feeling  of 
something  mysterious.  The  very  deification  which 
the  future  is  expected  to  bring,  and  which  in  itself 
is  something  that  can  neither  be  described  nor  con- 
ceived, is  now  administered,  as  though  it  were 
an  earnest  of  what  is  to  come,  by  means  of  ritual 
acts.  An  imaginative  mood  is  excited,  and  disposes 
to  its  reception;  and  this  excitement,  when  en- 
hanced, is  its  seal. 

Such  are  the  feelings  which  move  the  members  of 
the  Greek  Catholic  Church.  Intercourse  with  God 
is  achieved  through  the  cult  of  a  mystery,  and  by 
means  of  hundreds  of  efficacious  formulas  small  and 
great,  signs,  pictures,  and  consecrated  acts,  which, 
if  punctiliously  and  submissively  observed,  com- 
municate divine  grace  and  prepare  the  Christian  for 
eternal  life.  Doctrine,  as  such,  is  for  the  most  part 
something  unknown ;  if  it  appears  at  all,  it  is  only 
in  the  form  of  liturgical  aphorisms.  For  ninety-nine 
per  cent,  of  these  Christians,  religion  exists  only  as 
a  ceremonious  ritual,  in  which  it  is  externalised. 
But  even  for  Christians  of  advanced  intelligence  all 
these  ritual  acts  are  absolutely  necessary,  for  it  is 
only  in  them  that  doctrine  receives  its  correct  appli- 
cation and  obtains  its  due  result. 


Greek  Catholicism  255 

There  is  no  sadder  spectacle  than  this  transforma- 
tion of  the  Christian  religion  from  a  worship  of  God 
in  spirit  and  in  truth  into  a  worship  of  God 
in  signs,  formulas,  and  idols.  To  feel  the  whole 
pity  of  this  development,  we  need  not  descend  to 
such  adherents  of  this  form  of  Christendom  as  are 
religiously  and  intellectually  in  a  state  of  complete 
abandonment,  like  the  Copts  and  Abyssinians ;  the 
Syrians,  Greeks,  and  Russians  are,  taken  as  a  whole, 
only  a  little  better.  Where,  however,  can  we  find 
in  Jesus'  message  even  a  trace  of  any  injunction 
that  a  man  is  to  submit  to  solemn  ceremonies  as 
though  they  were  mysterious  ministrations,  to  be 
punctilious  in  observing  a  ritual,  to  put  up  pictures, 
and  to  mumble  maxims  and  formulas  in  a  prescribed 
fashion  ?  It  was  to  destroy  this  sort  of  religion 
that  Jesus  Christ  suffered  himself  to  be  nailed  to  the 
crosSy  and  now  we  find  it  re-established  under  his 
name  and  authority!  Not  only  has  "  mystagogy  " 
stepped  into  a  position  side  by  side  with  the  "  ma- 
thesis,"  that  is  to  say,  the  doctrine,  which  called  it 
forth ;  but  the  truth  is  that  *  *  doctrine  ' ' — be  its  con  - 
stitution  what  it  may,  it  is  still  a  spiritual  principle 
— has  disappeared,  and  ceremony  dominates  every- 
thing. This  is  what  marks  the  relapse  into  the  an- 
cient form  of  the  lowest  class  of  religion.  Over  the 
vast  area  of  Greek  and  Oriental  Christendom  re- 
ligion has  been  almost  stifled  by  ritualism.     It  is 


256  What  is  Christianity? 

not  that  religion  has  sacrificed  one  of  its  essential 
elements.  No !  it  has  entered  an  entirely  different 
plane ;  it  has  descended  to  the  level  where  religion 
may  be  described  as  a  cult  and  nothing  but  a  cult. 

Nevertheless,  Greek  and  Oriental  Christianity 
contains  within  itself  an  element  which  for  centuries 
has  been  capable  of  offering,  and  still  offers  here 
and  there  to-day,  a  certain  resistance  to  the  com- 
bined forces  of  traditionalism,  intellectualism,  and 
ritualism — I  mean  monasticism.  To  the  question, 
Who  is  in  the  highest  sense  of  the  word  Christian  ? 
the  Greek  Christian  replies:  the  monk.  The  man 
who  practises  silence  and  purity,  who  shuns  not 
only  the  world  but  also  the  Church  of  the  world ; 
who  avoids  not  only  false  doctrine  but  any  state- 
ment about  the  true ;  who  fasts,  gives  himself  up  to 
contemplation,  and  steadily  waits  for  God's  glorious 
light  to  dawn  upon  his  gaze ;  who  attaches  no  value  to 
anything  but  tranquillity  and  meditation  on  the 
Eternal;  who  asks  nothing  of  life  but  death,  and 
who  from  such  utter  unselfishness  and  purity  makes 
mercy  arise — this  is  the  Christian.  To  him  not  even 
the  Church  and  the  consecration  which  it  bestows  is  an 
absolute  necessity.  For  such  a  man  the  whole  system 
of  sanctified  secularity  has  vanished.  Over  and  over 
again  in  ascetics  of  this  kind  the  Church  has  seen  in 
its  ranks  figures  of  such  strength  and  delicacy  of  re- 


Greek  Catholicism  257 

ligious  feeling,  so  filled  with  the  divine,  so  inwardly 
active  in  forming  themselves  after  certain  features 
of  Christ's  image,  that  we  may,  indeed,  say,  Here 
there  is  a  living  religion  not  unworthy  of  Christ's 
name.  We  Protestants  must  not  take  direct  offence 
at  the  form  of  monasticism.  The  conditions  under 
which  our  churches  arose  have  made  a  harsh  and 
one-sided  opinion  of  it  a  kind  of  duty.  And  al- 
though for  the  present,  and  in  view  of  the  problems 
which  press  on  us,  we  may  be  justified  in  retaining 
this  opinion,  we  must  not  summarily  apply  it  to 
other  circumstances.  Nothing  but  monasticism 
could  provide  a  leaven  and  a  counterpoise  in  that 
traditionalistic  and  ritualistic  secular  Church  such 
as  the  Greek  Church  was  and  still  is.  Here  there 
was  freedom,  independence,  and  vivid  experience; 
here  the  truth  that  it  is  only  what  is  experienced 
and  comes  from  within  that  has  any  value  in  religion 
carried  the  day. 

And  yet,  the  invaluable  tension  which  in  this 
part  of  Christendom  existed  between  the  secular 
Church  and  monasticism  has  unhappily  almost  dis- 
appeared, and  of  the  blessing  which  it  established 
there  is  scarcely  a  trace  left.  Not  only  has  monas- 
ticism become  subject  to  the  Church  and  is  every- 
where bent  under  its  yoke,  but  the  secular  spirit 
has  in  a  special  degree  invaded  the  monasteries. 
Greek  and  Oriental  monks  are  now,  as  a  rule,  the 


258  What  is  Christianity  ? 

instruments  of  the  lowest  and  worst  functions  of  the 
Church,  of  the  worship  of  pictures  and  relics,  of  the 
crassest  superstition  and  the  most  imbecile  sorcery. 
Exceptions  are  not  wanting,  and  it  is  still  to  the 
monks  that  we  must  pin  our  hopes  of  a  better 
future;  but  it  is  not  easy  to  see  how  a  Church  is  to 
be  reformed  which,  teach  what  it  will,  is  content 
with  its  adherents  finding  the  Christian  faith  in  the 
observance  of  certain  ceremonies,  and  Christian 
morality  in  keeping  fast -days  correctly. 

As  to  our  last  question :  What  modifications  did 
the  Gospel  undergo  in  this  Church  and  how  did  it 
hold  its  own  ?  Well,  in  the  first  place,  I  do  not  ex- 
pect to  be  contradicted  if  I  answer  that  this  official 
ecclesiasticism  with  its  priests  and  its  cult,  with  all  its 
vessels,  saints,  vestments,  pictures,  and  amulets, with 
its  ordinances  of  fasting  and  its  festivals,  has  absol- 
utely nothing  to  do  with  the  religion  of  Christ.  It 
is  the  religion  of  the  ancient  world  tacked  on  to  cer- 
tain conceptions  in  the  Gospel ;  or,  rather,  it  is  the 
ancient  religion  with  the  Gospel  absorbed  into  it. 
The  religious  moods  which  are  here  produced  or 
which  turn  towards  this  kind  of  religion  are,  in  so  far 
as  they  can  still  be  called  religious  at  all,  of  a  class 
lower  than  Christian.  But  neither  have  its  tradition- 
alism and  its  "  orthodoxy  "  much  in  common  with 
the  Gospel ;  they,  too,  were  not  derived  from  it  and 


Greek  Catholicism  259 

cannot  be  traced  back  to  it.  Correct  doctrine,  re- 
verence, obedience,  the  shudderings  of  awe,  may  be 
valuable  and  edifying  things;  they  may  avail  to 
bind  and  restrain  the  individual,  especially  when 
they  draw  him  into  the  community  of  a  stable  so- 
ciety ;  but  they  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  Gospel, 
as  long  as  they  fail  to  touch  the  individual  at  the 
point  where  freedom  lies,  and  inner  decision  for  or 
against  God.  In  contrast  with  this,  monasticism, 
in  its  resolve  to  serve  God  by  an  ascetic  and  con- 
templative life,  contains  an  incomparably  more 
valuable  element,  because  sayings  of  Christ,  even 
though  applied  in  a  one-sided  and  limited  way,  are 
nevertheless  taken  as  a  standard,  and  the  possibility 
of  an  independent  inner  life  being  kindled  is  not  so 
far  removed. 

Not  so  far  removed — entirely  lacking,  thank  God, 
it  is  not,  even  in  the  waste  shrines  of  this  ecclesias- 
ticism,  and  Christ's  sayings  sound  in  the  ear  of  any 
who  visit  its  churches.  On  the  Church  as  a  Church, 
apparatus  and  all,  there  is  nothing  more  favourable 
to  be  said  than  has  been  said  already;  the  best 
thing  about  it  is  that  it  keeps  up,  although  to  a 
modest  extent,  the  knowledge  of  the  Gospel.  Jesus* 
words,  even  though  only  mumbled  by  the  priests, 
take  the  first  place  in  this  Church,  too,  and  the  quiet 
mission  which  they  pursue  is  not  suppressed.  Side  by 
side  with  the  magical  apparatus  and  the  transports 


26o  What  is  Christianity  ? 

of  feeling,  of  which  the  ceremony  is  only  the 
caput  mortuuniy  stand  Jesus'  sayings ;  they  are  read 
in  private  and  in  public,  and  no  superstition  avails  to 
destroy  their  power.  Nor  can  its  fruits  be  mistaken 
by  anyone  who  will  look  below  the  surface.  Among 
these  Christians,  too,  priests  and  laity,  there  are 
men  who  have  come  to  know  God  as  the  Father  of 
mercy  and  the  leader  of  their  lives,  and  who  love 
Jesus  Christ,  not  because  they  know  him  as  the  per- 
son with  two  natures,  but  because  a  ray  of  his  being 
has  shone  from  the  Gospel  into  their  hearts,  and 
this  ray  has  become  light  and  warmth  to  their  own 
lives.  And  although  the  idea  of  the  fatherly  pro- 
vidence of  God  more  readily  assumes  an  almost 
fatalistic  form  in  the  East,  and  produces  too  much 
quietism,  it  is  certain  that  here,  too,  it  endows  men 
with  strength  and  energy,  unselfishness  and  love.  I 
need  only  refer  again  to  Tolstoi's  Village  Tales y 
which  I  have  already  quoted.  The  picture  which 
they  present  is  not  artificial.  But  from  much  also 
that  I  have  myself  seen  and  experienced  I  can  tes- 
tify how  even  with  the  Russian  peasant  or  the 
humbler  priests,  in  spite  of  all  the  saint-  and  pic- 
ture-worship, a  power  of  simple  trust  in  God  is  to 
be  found,  a  delicacy  of  moral  feeling,  and  an  active 
brotherly  love,  which  does  not  disclaim  its  origin 
in  the  Gospel.  Where  they  exist,  however,  the  en- 
tire ceremonial  service  of  religion  is  capable  of  un- 


Greek  Catholicism  261 

dergoing  a  spiritualisation,  not  by  any  **  symbolical 
re-interpretation," — that  is  much  too  artificial  a  pro- 
cess,— but  because,  if  only  the  soul  is  touched  by 
the  living  God  at  all,  thought  can  rise  to  him  even 
by  the  help  of  an  idol. 

But  it  is  truly  no  accidental  circumstance  that,  in 
so  far  as  any  independent  religious  life  is  to  be 
found  among  the  members  of  this  Church,  it  at  once 
takes  shape  in  trust  in  God,  in  humility,  in  unself- 
ishness and  mercy,  and  that  Jesus  Christ  is  at  the 
same  time  laid  hold  of  with  reverence;  for  these  are 
just  the  indications  which  show  us  that  the  Gospel 
is  not  as  yet  stifled,  and  that  it  is  in  these  religious 
virtues  that  it  has  its  real  substance. 

As  a  whole  and  in  its  structure  the  system  of  the 
Oriental  Churches  is  foreign  to  the  Gospel ;  it  means 
at  once  a  veritable  transformation  of  the  Christian 
faith  and  the  depression  of  religion  to  a  much  lower 
level,  namely,  that  of  the  ancient  world.  But  in  its 
monasticism,  in  so  far  as  this  is  not  entirely  subject 
to  the  secular  Church  and  itself  secularised,  there  is 
an  element  which  reduces  the  whole  ecclesiastical 
apparatus  to  a  secondary  position,  and  which  opens 
up  the  possibility  of  attaining  a  state  of  Christian 
independence.  Above  all,  however,  by  not  having 
suppressed  the  Gospel,  but  by  having  kept  it  acces- 
sible, even  though  in  a  meagre  fashion,  the  Church 


262  What  is  Christianity  ? 

still  possesses  the  corrective  in  its  midst.  Side  by 
side  with  the  Church  the  Gospel  exercises  its  own 
influence  on  individuals.  This  influence,  however, 
takes  shape  in  a  type  of  religion  exhibiting  the  very 
characteristics  which  we  have  shown  to  be  most  dis- 
tinctive of  Jesus*  message.  Thus  on  the  ground 
occupied  by  this  Church  the  Gospel  has  not  com- 
pletely perished.  Here,  too,  human  souls  find  a 
dependence  on  God  and  a  freedom  in  Him,  and 
when  they  have  found  these,  they  speak  the  lan- 
guage which  every  Christian  understands,  and 
which  goes  to  every  Christian's  heart. 


LECTURE   XIV 

THE  CHRISTIAN  RELIGION  IN  ROMAN  CATHOLICISM 

THE  Roman  Church  is  the  most  comprehensive 
and  the  vastest,  the  most  complicated  and  yet 
at  the  same  time  the  most  uniform  structure  which, 
as  far  as  we  know,  history  has  produced.  All  the 
powers  of  the  human  mind  and  soul,  and  all  the 
elemental  forces  at  mankind's  disposal,  have  had  a 
hand  in  creating  it.  In  its  many-sided  character 
and  severe  cohesion  Roman  Catholicism  is  far  in 
advance  of  Greek.     We  ask,  in  turn  : 

What  did  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  achieve  ? 

What  are  its  characteristics  ? 

What  modifications  has  the  Gospel  suffered  in 
this  Church,  and  how  much  of  it  has  remained  ? 

What  did  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  achieve  ? 
Well,  in  the  first  place,  it  educated  the  Romano- 
Germanic  nations,  and  educated  them  in  a  sense 
other  than  that  in  which  the  Eastern  Church  edu- 
cated the  Greeks,  Slavs,  and  Orientals.  However 
much  their  original  nature,  or  primitive  and  histori- 
cal circumstances,  may  have  favoured  those  nations 
and  helped  to  promote  their  rise,  the  value  of  the 

263 


264  What  is  Christianity  ? 

services  which  the  Church  rendered  is  not  thereby 
diminished.  It  brought  Christian  civilisation  to 
young  nations,  and  brought  it,  not  once  only, — so 
as  to  keep  them  at  its  first  stage, — no!  it  gave  them 
something  which  was  capable  of  exercising  a  pro- 
gressive educational  influence,  and  for  a  period  of 
almost  a  thousand  years  it  itself  led  the  advance. 
Up  to  the  fourteenth  century  it  was  a  leader  and  a 
mother;  it  supplied  the  ideas,  set  the  aims,  and 
disengaged  the  forces.  Up  to  the  fourteenth  cent- 
ury— thenceforward,  as  we  may  see,  those  whom  it 
educated  became  independent,  and  struck  out  paths 
w^hich  it  did  not  indicate,  and  on  which  it  is  neither 
willing  nor  able  to  follow  them.  But  even  so, 
however,  during  the  period  covered  by  the  last  six 
hundred  years  it  has  not  fallen  so  far  behind  as  the 
Greek  Church.  With  comparatively  brief  interrup- 
tions it  has  proved  itself  fully  a  match  for  the  whole 
movement  of  politics, — we  in  Germany  know  that 
well  enough  ! — and  even  in  the  movement  of  thought 
it  still  has  an  important  share.  The  time,  of  course, 
is  long  past  since  it  was  a  leader;  on  the  contrary, 
it  is  now  a  drag;  but,  in  view  of  the  mistaken  and 
precipitate  elements  in  modern  progress,  the  drag 
which  it  supplies  is  not  always  the  reverse  of  a 
blessing. 

In  the  second  place,  however,  this  Church  upheld 
the  idea  of  religious  and  ecclesiastical  independence 


Roman  Catholicism  265 

in  Western  Europe  in  the  face  of  the  tendencies, 
not  lacking  here  either,  towards  State-omnipotence 
in  the  spiritual  domain.  In  the  Greek  Church,  as 
we  saw,  religion  has  become  so  intimately  allied  with 
nationality  and  the  State  that,  public  worship  and 
monasticism  apart,  it  has  no  room  left  for  independ- 
ent action.  On  Western  ground  it  is  otherwise ;  the 
religious  element  and  the  moral  element  bound  up 
with  it  occupy  an  independent  sphere  and  jealously 
guard  it.  This  we  owe  in  the  main  to  the  Roman 
Church. 

These  two  facts  embrace  the  most  important 
piece  of  work  which  this  Church  achieved  and  in 
part  still  achieves.  We  have  already  indicated  the 
bounds  which  must  be  set  to  the  first.  To  the 
second  also  a  sensible  limitation  attaches,  and  we 
shall  see  what  it  is  as  we  proceed. 

What  are  the  characteristics  of  the  Roman 
Church  ?  This  was  our  second  question.  Unless 
I  am  mistaken,  the  Church,  complicated  as  it  is, 
may  be  resolved  into  three  chief  elements.  The 
first,  Catholicism,  it  shares  with  the  Greek  Church. 
The  second  is  the  Latin  spirit  and  the  Roma?i  World- 
Empire  continuing  in  the  Roman  Church.  The 
third  is  the  spirit  and  religious  fervour  of  St.  Au- 
gustine. So  far  as  the  inner  life  of  this  Church  is 
religious  life  and  religious  thought,  it  follows  the 


266  What  is  Christianity  ? 

standard  which  St.  Augustine  authoritatively  fixed. 
Not  only  has  he  arisen  again  and  again  in  his  many 
successors,  but  he  has  awakened  and  kindled  num- 
bers of  men  who,  coming  forward  with  independent 
religious  and  theological  fervour,  are  nevertheless 
spirit  of  his  spirit. 

These  three  elements,  the  Catholic,  the  Latin  in 
the  sense  of  the  Roman  World-Empire,  and  the 
Augustinian,  constitute  the  peculiar  character  of 
the  Roman  Church. 

So  far  as  the  first  is  concerned,  you  may  recognise 
its  importance  by  the  fact  that  the  Roman  Church 
to-day  receives  every  Greek  Christian,  nay,  at  once 
effects  a  **  union  "  with  every  Greek  ecclesiastical 
community,  without  more  ado,  as  soon  as  the  Pope 
is  acknowledged  and  submission  is  made  to  his 
apostolic  supremacy.  Any  other  condition  that 
may  be  exacted  from  the  Greek  Christians  is  of 
absolutely  no  moment;  they  are  even  allowed  to 
retain  divine  worship  in  their  mother  tongue,  and 
married  priests.  If  we  consider  what  a  '*  purifica- 
tion "  Protestants  have  to  undergo  before  they  can 
be  received  into  the  bosom  of  the  Roman  Church, 
the  difference  is  obvious.  Now  a  Church  cannot 
make  so  great  a  mistake  about  itself  as  to  omit  any 
essential  condition  in  taking  up  new  members, 
especially  if  they  come  from  another  confession. 
The  element  which  the  Roman  Church  shares  with 


Roman  Catholicism  267 

the  Greek  must,  then,  be  of  significant  and  critical 
importance,  when  it  is  sufficient  to  make  union  pos- 
sible on  the  condition  that  the  papal  supremacy  is 
recognised.  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  main  points 
characteristic  of  Greek  Catholicism  are  all  to  be 
found  in  Roman  as  well,  and  are,  on  occasion,  just 
as  energetically  maintained  here  as  they  are  there. 
Traditionalism,  orthodoxy,  and  ritualism  play  just 
the  same  part  here  as  they  do  there,  so  far  as 
*'  higher  considerations"  do  not  step  in;  and  the 
same  is  true  of  monasticism  also. 

So  far  as  *'  higher  considerations  "  do  not  step  in 
— here  we  have  already  passed  to  the  examination 
of  the  second  element,  namely,  the  Latin  spirit  in 
the  sense  of  the  Roman  World-dominion.  In  the 
Western  half  of  Christendom  the  Latin  spirit,  the 
spirit  of  Rome,  very  soon  effected  certain  distinct 
modifications  in  the  general  Catholic  idea.  As 
early  as  the  beginning  of  the  third  century  we  see 
the  thought  emerging  in  the  Latin  Fathers  that 
salvation,  however  effected  and  whatever  its  nature, 
is  bestowed  in  the  form  of  a  contract  under  definite 
conditions,  and  only  to  the  extent  to  which  they 
are  observed ;  it  is  salus  legitima  ;  in  fixing  these 
conditions  the  Deity  manifested  its  mercy  and  in- 
dulgence, but  it  guards  their  observance  all  the 
more  jealously.  Further,  the  whole  contents  of 
revelation  are  lexy  the  Bible  as  well   as  tradition. 


268  What  is  Christianity  ? 

Again,  this  tradition  is  attached  to  a  class  of  officials 
and  to  their  correct  succession.  The  **  mysteries," 
however,  are  "  sacraments  " ;  that  is  to  say,  on  the 
one  hand,  they  are  binding  acts;  on  the  other,  they 
contain  definite  gifts  of  grace  in  a  carefully  limited 
form  and  with  a  specific  application.  Again,  the 
discipline  of  penance  is  a  procedure  laid  down  by 
law  and  akin  to  the  process  adopted  in  a  civil  action 
or  a  suit  in  defence  of  honour.  Lastly,  the  Church 
is  a  legal  institution ;  and  it  is  so,  not  side  by  side 
with  its  function  of  preserving  and  distributing  sal- 
vation, but  it  is  a  legal  institution  for  the  sake  of 
this  very  function. 

But  it  is  in  its  constitution  as  a  Church  that  it  is 
a  legal  establishment.  We  must  briefly  see  how 
things  stand  in  regard  to  this  constitution,  as  its 
foundations  are  common  to  the  Eastern  and  the 
Western  Church,  When  the  monarchical  episco- 
pate had  developed,  the  Church  began  to  approxi- 
mate its  constitution  to  State  government.  The 
system  of  uniting  sees  under  a  metropolitan  who 
was,  as  a  rule,  the  bishop  of  the  provincial  capital, 
corresponded  with  the  distribution  of  the  Empire 
into  provinces.  Above  and  beyond  this,  the  ecclesi- 
astical constitution  in  the  East  was  developed  a 
step  further  when  it  adapted  itself  to  the  division 
of  the  Empire  introduced  by  Diocletian,  by  which 
large  groups  of  provinces  were  united.     Thus  arose 


Roman  Catholicism  269 

the  constitution  of  the  patriarchate,  which  was  not, 
however,  strictly  enforced,  and  was  in  part  counter- 
acted by  other  considerations. 

In  the  West  no  division  into  patriarchates  came 
about;  but,  on  the  other  hand,  something  else  hap- 
pened: in  the  fifth  century  the  Western  Roman 
Empire  perished  of  internal  weakness  and  through 
the  inroads  of  the  barbarians.  What  was  left  of 
what  was  Roman  took  refuge  in  the  Roman  Church 
— civilisation,  law,  and  orthodox  faith  as  opposed 
to  the  Arian.  The  barbarian  chiefs,  however,  did 
not  venture  to  set  themselves  up  as  Roman  Em- 
perors, and  enter  the  vacant  shrine  of  the  i7nperium; 
they  founded  empires  of  their  own  in  the  provinces. 
In  these  circumstances  the  Bishop  of  Rome  ap- 
peared as  the  guardian  of  the  past  and  the  shield  of 
the  future.  All  over  the  provinces  occupied  by  the 
barbarians,  even  in  those  which  had  previously 
maintained  a  defiant  independence  in  the  face  of 
Rome,  bishops  and  laity  looked  to  him.  Whatever 
Roman  elements  the  barbarians  and  Arians  left 
standing  in  the  provinces — and  they  were  not  few — 
were  ecclesiasticised  and  at  the  same  time  put  under 
the  protection  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  who  was  the 
chief  person  there  after  the  Emperor's  disappear- 
ance. But  in  Rome  the  episcopal  throne  was  occu- 
pied in  the  fifth  century  by  men  who  understood 
the  signs  of  the  times  and  utilised  them  to  the  full. 


2'jo  What  is  Christianity  ? 

The  Roman  Church  in  this  way  privily  pushed  itself 
into  the  place  of  the  Roinan  World-Empire,  of  which 
it  is  the  actual  continuation ;  the  empire  has  not 
perished,  but  has  only  undergone  a  transformation. 
If  we  assert,  and  mean  the  assertion  to  hold  good 
even  of  the  present  time,  that  the  Roman  Church 
is  the  old  Roman  Empire  consecrated  by  the  Gos- 
pel, that  is  no  mere  **  clever  remark,"  but  the 
recognition  of  the  true  state  of  the  matter  historic- 
ally, and  the  most  appropriate  and  fruitful  way  of 
describing  the  character  of  this  Church.  It  still 
governs  the  nations;  its  Popes  rule  like  Trajan  and 
Marcus  Aurelius;  Peter  and  Paul  have  taken  the 
place  of  Romulus  and  Remus;  the  bishops  and 
archbishops,  of  the  proconsuls;  the  troops  of  priests 
and  monks  correspond  to  the  legions;  the  Jesuits, 
to  the  imperial  body-guard.  The  continued  influ- 
ence of  the  old  Empire  and  its  institutions  may  be 
traced  in  detail,  down  to  individual  legal  ordinances, 
nay,  even  in  the  very  clothes.  That  is  no  Church 
like  the  evangelical  communities,  or  the  national 
Churches  of  the  East;  it  is  a  political  creation,  and 
as  imposing  as  a  World- Empire,  because  the  con- 
tinuation of  the  Roman  Empire.  The  Pope,  who 
calls  himself*  King"  and  **  Pontifex  Maximus,"  is 
Caesar's  successor.  The  Church,  which  as  early  as 
the  third  and  fourth  century  was  entirely  filled  with 
the  Roman  spirit,  has   re-established  in  itself  the 


Roman  Catholicism  271 

Roman  Empire.  Nor  have  patriotic  Catholics  in 
Rome  and  Italy  in  every  century  from  the  seventh 
and  eighth  onwards  understood  the  matter  other- 
wise. When  Gregory  VII.  entered  upon  the 
struggle  with  the  imperial  power,  this  is  the  way 
in  which  an  Italian  prelate  fired  his  ardour: 

Seize  the  first  Apostle's  sword, 
Peter's  glowing  sword,  and  smite  ! 

Scatter  far  the  savage  horde  ; 

Break  their  wild,  impetuous  might ! 

Let  them  feel  the  yoke  of  yore, 

Let  them  bear  it  evermore  ! 

What  with  blood  in  Marius'  day, 

Marius  and  his  soldiers  brave, 
Or,  by  Julius'  mighty  sway, 

Romans  did  their  land  to  save. 
Thou  canst  do  by  simple  word. 
Great  the  Church's  holy  sword  ! 

Rome  made  great  again  by  thee 

Offers  all  thy  meed  of  praise  ; 
Not  for  Scipio's  victory 

Did  it  louder  paeans  raise, 
Nor  entwine  the  laurel  crown 
For  a  deed  of  more  renown. 

Who  is  it  that  is  thus  addressed,  a  bishop  or  a 
Caesar  ?  A  Caesar,  I  imagine ;  it  was  felt  to  be  so 
then,  and  it  is  still  felt  to  be  so  to-day.  It  is  an 
Empire  that  this  priestly  Caesar  rules,  and  to  attack 
it  with  the  armament  of  dogmatic  polemics  alone  is 
to  beat  the  air. 

I  cannot  here  show  what  immense  results  follow 


2  72  What  is  Christianity? 

from  the  fact  that  the  Catholic  Church  is  the 
Roman  Empire.  Let  me  mention  only  a  few  con- 
clusions which  the  Church  itself  draws.  It  is  just 
as  essential  to  this  Church  to  exercise  governmental 
power  as  to  proclaim  the  Gospel.  The  phrase 
**  Christus  vincit,  Christus  regnat,  Christus  trium- 
phat,"  must  be  understood  in  a  political  sense.  He 
rules  on  earth  by  the  fact  that  his  Rome-directed 
Church  rules,  and  rules,  too,  by  law  and  by  force ; 
that  is  to  say,  it  employs  all  the  means  of  which 
states  avail  themselves.  Accordingly  it  recognises 
no  form  of  religious  fervour  which  does  not  first  of 
all  submit  to  this  papal  Church,  is  approved  by  it, 
and  remains  in  constant  dependence  upon  it.  This 
Church,  then,  teaches  its  "subjects"  to  say: 
"  Though  I  understand  all  mysteries,  and  though  I 
have  all  faith,  and  though  I  bestow  all  my  goods  to 
feed  the  poor,  and  though  I  give  my  body  to  be 
burned,  and  have  not  unity  in  love,  which  alone 
floweth  from  unconditional  obedience  to  the  Church, 
it  profiteth  me  nothing."  Outside  the  pale  of  the 
Church,  all  faith,  all  love,  all  the  virtues,  even  mar- 
tyrdoms, are  of  no  value  whatever.  Naturally ;  for 
even  an  earthly  state  appreciates  only  those  services 
which  a  man  has  rendered  for  its  sake.  But  here 
the  state  identifies  itself  with  the  kingdom  of 
Heaven,  in  other  respects  proceeding  just  like  other 
states.     From  this  fact  you  can  yourselves  deduce 


Roman  Catholicism  273 

all  the  Church's  claims;  they  follow  without  diffi- 
culty.    Even  the  most  exorbitant  demand  appears 
quite  natural  as  soon  as  you  only  admit  the  truth  of 
the  two  leading  propositions:  "  The  Roman  Church 
is  the  kingdom  of  God,"  and,  "  The  Church  must 
govern  like  an  earthly  state."     It  is  not  to  be  de- 
nied that  Christian  motives  have  also  had  a  hand  in 
this  development :  the  desire  to  bring  the  Christian 
religion  into  a  real  connexion  with  life,  and  to  make 
its  influence  felt  in  every  situation  that  may  arise, 
as  well  as  anxiety  for  the  salvation  of  individuals 
and  of  nations.     How  many  earnest  Catholic  Christ- 
ians there  have  been  who  had  no  other  real  desire 
than  to  estabhsh  Christ's  rule  on  earth  and  build  up 
his  kingdom  !    But  while  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
their  intention,  and  the  energy  with  which  they  put 
their  hands  to  the  work,  made  them  superior  to  the 
Greeks,  there  can  be  as  little  that  it  is  a  serious  mis- 
understanding of  Christ's  and  the  apostles'  injunc- 
tions to  aim   at   establishing  and  building  up    the 
kingdom  of    God  by    political    means.     The    only 
forces  which  this  kingdom  knows  are  religious  and 
moral  forces,  and  it  rests  on  a  basis  of  freedom.    But 
when  a  church  comes  forward  with  the  claims  of  an 
earthly  state,  it   is  bound  to  make  use  of  all  the 
means  at  the  disposal  of  that  state,  including,  there- 
fore, crafty    diplomacy  and  force;    for  the  earthly 
state,  even  a  state  governed  by  law,  must  on  occasion 


2  74  What  is  Christianity? 

become  a  state  that  acts  contrary  to  law.  The 
course  of  development  which  this  Church  has  fol- 
lowed as  an  earthly  state  was,  then,  bound  to  lead 
logically  to  the  absolute  monarchy  of  the  Pope  and 
his  infallibility ;  for  in  an  earthly  theocracy  infalli- 
bility means,  at  bottom,  nothing  more  than  full 
sovereignty  means  in  a  secular  state.  That  the 
Church  has  not  shrunk  from  drawing  this  last  con- 
clusion is  a  proof  of  the  extent  to  which  the  sacred 
element  in  it  has  become  secularised. 

That  this  second  element  was  bound  to  produce  a 
radical  change  in  the  characteristic  features  of 
Catholicism  in  Western  Europe,  in  its  traditional- 
ism, its  orthodoxy,  its  ritualism,  and  its  monastic- 
ism-,  is  obvious.  Traditionalism  holds  the  same 
position  after  the  change  as  it  did  before ;  but  when 
any  element  in  it  has  become  inconvenient,  it  is 
dropped  and  its  place  taken  by  the  papal  will.  '*  La 
tradition,  c'est  moi "  as  Pius  IX.  is  reported  to 
have  said.  Further,  "sound  doctrine"  is  still  a 
leading  principle,  but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  can  be 
altered  by  the  ecclesiastical  policy  of  the  Pope; 
subtle  distinctions  have  given  many  a  dogma  a  new 
meaning.  New  dogmas,  too,  are  promulgated.  In 
many  respects  doctrine  has  become  more  arbitrary, 
and  a  rigid  formula  in  a  matter  of  dogma  may  be  set 
aside  by  a  contrary  injunction  in  a  matter  of  ethics 
and  in  the  confessional.     The  hard  and  fast  lines  of 


Roman  Catholicism  275 

the  past  can  be  everywhere  relaxed  in  favour  of  the 
needs  of  the  present.  The  same  holds  good  of  ritu- 
alism, as  also  of  monasticism.  The  extent  to  which 
the  old  monasticism  has  been  altered,  by  no  means 
always  to  its  disadvantage  alone,  and  has  even  in 
some  important  aspects  been  transformed  into  its 
flat  opposite,  I  cannot  here  show.  In  its  organisa- 
tion this  Church  possesses  a  faculty  of  adapting  itself 
to  the  course  of  history  such  as  no  other  Church  pos- 
sesses; it  always  remains  the  same  old  Church,  or 
seems  to  do  so,  and  is  always  becoming  a  new  one. 

The  third  element  determining  the  character  of 
the  spirit  prevalent  in  the  Church  is  opposed  to  that 
which  we  have  just  discussed,  and  yet  has  held  its 
own  side  by  side  with  the  second :  it  goes  by  the 
names  of  Augustine  and  Augustinianism.  In  the 
fifth  century,  at  the  very  time  when  the  Church  was 
setting  itself  to  acquire  the  inheritance  of  the  Ro- 
man Empire,  it  came  into  possession  of  a  religious 
genius  of  extraordinary  depth  and  power,  accepted 
his  ideas  and  feelings,  and  up  to  the  present  day 
has  been  unable  to  get  rid  of  them.  That  the 
Church  became  at  one  and  the  same  time  Caesarian 
and  Augustinian  is  the  most  important  and  marvel- 
lous fact  in  its  history.  What  kind  of  a  spirit,  how- 
ever, and  what  kind  of  a  tendency,  did  it  receive 
from  Augustine  ? 


276  What  is  Christianity? 

Well,  in  the  first  place,  Augustine's  theology  and 
his  religious  fervour  denote  a  special  resuscitation  of 
the  Pauline  experience  and  doctrine  of  sin  and 
grace,  of  guilt  and  justification,  of  divine  predestina- 
tion and  human  servitude.  In  the  centuries  that 
had  elapsed  since  the  apostle's  day  this  experience 
and  the  doctrine  embodying  it  had  been  lost,  but 
Augustine  went  through  the  same  inner  experiences 
as  Paul,  gave  them  the  same  sort  of  expression,  and 
clothed  them  in  definite  conceptions.  There  was  no 
question  here  of  mere  imitation ;  the  individual  dif- 
ferences between  the  two  cases  are  of  the  utmost 
importance,  especially  in  the  way  in  which  the  doc- 
trine of  justification  is  conceived.  With  Augustine, 
it  was  represented  as  a  constant  process,  continuing 
until  love  and  all  the  virtues  completely  filled  the 
heart ;  but,  as  with  Paul,  it  is  all  a  matter  of  indi- 
vidual experience  and  inner  life.  If  you  read  Au- 
gustine's Confessions  you  will  acknowledge  that  in 
spite  of  all  the  rhetoric — and  rhetoric  there  is — it  is 
the  work  of  a  genius  who  has  felt  God,  the  God  of 
the  Spirit,  to  be  the  be-all  and  the  end-all  of  his  life; 
who  thirsts  after  Him  and  desires  nothing  beside 
Him.  Further,  all  the  sad  and  terrible  experiences 
which  he  had  had  in  his  own  person,  all  the  rupture 
with  himself,  all  the  service  of  transient  things,  the 
"crumbling  away  into  the  world  bit  by  bit,"  and 
the  egoism  for   which  he    had    to    pay    in    loss   of 


Roman  Catholicism  277 

strength  and  freedom,  he  reduces  to  the  one  root, 
si?i ;  that  is  to  say,  lack  of  communion  with  God, 
godlessness.  Again,  what  released  him  from  the 
entanglements  of  the  world,  from  selfishness  and  in- 
ner decay,  and  gave  him  strength,  freedom,  and  a 
consciousness  of  the  Eternal,  he  calls,  with  Paul, 
grace.  With  him  he  feels,  too,  that  grace  is  wholly 
the  work  of  God,  but  that  it  is  obtained  through 
and  by  Christ,  and  possessed  as  forgiveness  of  sins 
and  as  the  spirit  of  love.  He  is  much  less  free  and 
more  beset  with  scruples  in  his  view  of  sin  than  the 
great  apostle ;  and  it  is  this  which  gives  his  religious 
language  and  everything  that  proceeded  from  him 
quite  a  peculiar  colour.  **  Forgetting  those  things 
which  are  behind,  and  reaching  forth  unto  those 
things  which  are  before" — the  apostolic  maxim  is 
not  Augustine's.  Consolation  for  the  misery  of  sin 
— this  is  the  complexion  of  his  entire  Christianity. 
Only  rarely  was  he  capable  of  soaring  to  the  sense 
of  the  glorious  liberty  of  the  children  of  God;  and, 
where  he  was  so  capable,  he  could  not  testify  to  it 
in  the  same  way  as  Paul.  But  he  could  express  the 
sense  of  consolation  for  the  misery  of  sin  with  a 
strength  of  feeling  and  in  words  of  an  overwhelming 
force  such  as  no  one  before  him  ever  displayed ;  nay, 
more :  he  has  managed  by  what  he  has  written  to  go 
so  straight  to  the  souls  of  millions,  to  describe  so 
precisely  their  inner  condition,  and  so  impressively 


278  What  is  Christianity? 

and  overpoweringly  to  put  the  consolation  be- 
fore them,  that  what  he  felt  has  been  felt  again 
and  again  for  fifteen  hundred  years.  Up  to  the  day 
in  which  we  live,  so  far  as  Catholic  Christians  are 
concerned,  inward  and  vivid  religious  fervour,  and 
the  expression  which  it  takes,  are  in  their  whole 
character  Augustinian.  It  is  by  what  he  felt  that 
they  are  kindled,  and  it  is  his  thoughts  that  they 
think.  Nor  is  it  otherwise  with  many  Protestants, 
and  those  not  of  the  worst  kind.  This  juxtaposition 
of  sin  and  grace,  this  interconnexion  of  feeling  and 
doctrine,  seems  to  possess  an  indestructible  power 
which  no  lapse  of  time  is  able  to  touch;  this  feel- 
ing of  mixed  pain  and  bliss  is  an  unforgettable  pos- 
session with  those  who  have  once  experienced  it; 
and  even  though  they  may  have  subsequently  eman- 
cipated themselves  from  religion  it  remains  for  them 
a  sacred  memory. 

The  Western  Church  opened,  and  was  compelled 
to  open,  its  doors  to  this  Augustine  at  the  very 
moment  when  it  was  preparing  to  enter  upon  its  do- 
minion. It  was  defenceless  in  face  of  him ;  it  had 
so  little  of  any  real  value  to  offer  from  its  immedi- 
ate past  that  it  weakly  capitulated.  Thus  arose 
the  astonishing  "  complexio  oppositorum  "  which 
we  see  in  Western  Catholicism  :  the  Church  of  rites, 
of  law,  of  politics,  of  world-dominion,  and  the 
Church  in  which  a  highly  individual,  delicate,  sub- 


Roman  Catholicism  279 

limated  sense  and  doctrine  of  sin  and  grace  is 
brought  into  play.  The  external  and  the  internal 
elements  are  supposed  to  unite !  To  speak  frankly, 
this  has  been  impossible  from  the  beginning ;  inter- 
nal tension  and  conflict  were  bound  to  arise  at  once ; 
the  history  of  Western  Catholicism  is  full  of  it.  Up 
to  a  certain  point,  however,  these  antitheses  admit 
of  being  reconciled ;  they  admit  of  it  at  least  so  far 
as  the  same  men  are  concerned.  That  is  proved  by 
no  less  a  person  than  Augustine  himself,  who,  in 
addition  to  his  other  characteristics,  was  also  a 
staunch  Churchman ;  nay,  who  in  such  matters  as 
power  and  prestige  promoted  the  external  interests 
of  the  Church,  and  its  equipment  as  a  whole,  with 
the  greatest  energy.  I  cannot  here  explain  how  he 
managed  to  accomplish  this  work,  but  that  there 
could  be  no  lack  of  internal  contradictions  in  it  is 
obvious.  Only  let  us  be  clear  about  two  facts: 
firstly,  that  the  outward  Church  is  more  and  more 
forcing  the  inward  Augustinianism  into  the  back- 
ground, and  transforming  and  modifying  it,  with- 
out, however,  being  able  wholly  to  destroy  it; 
secondly,  that  all  the  great  personalities  who  have 
continued  to  kindle  religious  fervour  afresh  in  the 
Western  Church,  and  to  purify  and  deepen  it,  have 
directly  or  indirectly  proceeded  from  Augustine  and 
formed  themselves  on  him.  The  long  chain  of 
Catholic  reformers,  from  Agobard  and  Claudius  of 


28o  What  is  Christianity  ? 

Turin  in  the  ninth  century  down  to  the  Jansenists 
in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth,  and  beyond 
them,  is  Augustinian.  And  if  the  Council  of  Trent 
may  be  in  many  respects  rightly  called  a  Council  of 
Reform ;  if  the  doctrine  of  penance  and  grace  was 
formulated  then  with  much  more  depth  and  inward- 
ness than  could  be  expected  from  the  state  of 
Catholic  theology  in  the  fourteenth  and  fifteenth 
centuries,  that  is  only  owing  to  the  continued  influ- 
ence of  Augustine.  With  the  doctrine  of  grace, 
taken  from  Augustine,  the  Church  has,  indeed, 
associated  a  practice  of  the  confessional  which 
threatens  to  make  that  doctrine  absolutely  ineffect- 
ive. But,  however  far  it  may  stretch  its  bounds  so 
as  to  keep  all  those  within  its  pale  who  do  not  re- 
volt against  its  authority,  it  after  all  not  only  toler- 
ates such  as  take  the  same  view  of  sin  and  grace  as 
Augustine,  but  it  also  desires  that,  wherever  possi- 
ble, everyone  may  feel  as  strongly  as  he  the  gravity 
of  sin  and  the  blessedness  of  belonging  to  God. 

Such  are  the  essential  elements  of  Roman 
Catholicism.  There  is  much  else  that  might  be 
mentioned,  but  what  has  been  said  denotes  the 
leading  points. 

We  pass  to  the  last  question  :  What  modifications 
has  the  Gospel  here  undergone,  and  how  much  of  it 
is  left  ?    Well, — this  is  not  a  matter  that  needs  many 


Roman  Catholicism  281 

words, — the  whole  outward  and  visible  institution  of 
a  Church  claiming  divine  dignity  has  no  foundation 
whatever  in  the  Gospel.  It  is  a  case,  not  of  distor- 
tion, but  of  total  perversion.  Religion  has  here 
strayed  away  in  a  direction  that  is  not  its  own.  As 
Eastern  Catholicism  may  in  many  respects  be  more 
appropriately  regarded  as  part  of  the  history  of 
Greek  religion  than  of  the  history  of  the  Gospel,  so 
Roman  Catholicism  must  be  regarded  as  part  of  the 
history  of  the  Roman  World-Empire.  To  contend, 
as  it  does,  that  Christ  founded  a  kingdom;  that  this 
kingdom  is  the  Roman  Church;  that  he  equipped  it 
with  a  sword,  nay,  with  two  swords,  a  spiritual  and 
a  temporal,  is  to  secularise  the  Gospel;  nor  can  this 
contention  be  sustained  by  appealing  to  the  idea 
that  Christ's  spirit  ought  certainly  to  bear  rule 
amongst  mankind.  The  Gospel  says,  "  Christ's 
kingdom  is  not  of  this  world,"  but  the  Church  has 
set  up  an  earthly  kingdom  ;  Christ  demands  that  his 
ministers  shall  not  rule  but  serve,  but  here  the 
priests  govern  the  world ;  Christ  leads  his  disciples 
away  from  political  and  ceremonious  religion  and 
places  every  man  face  to  face  with  God — God  and 
the  soul,  the  soul  and  its  God,  but  here,  on  the  con- 
trary, man  is  bound  to  an  earthly  institution  with 
chains  that  cannot  be  broken,  and  he  must  obey;  it 
is  only  when  he  obeys  that  he  approaches  God. 
There  was  a  time  when  Roman  Christians  shed  their 


282  What  is  Christianity  ? 

blood  because  they  refused  to  do  worship  to  Caesar, 
and  rejected  religion  of  the  political  kind;  to-day 
they  do  not,  indeed,  actually  pray  to  an  earthly 
ruler,  but  they  have  subjected  their  souls  to  the 
despotic  orders  of  the  Roman  papal  king. 


LECTURE  XV 

THE  point  to  which  we  referred  at  the  close  of 
the  last  lecture  was  that,  as  an  outward  and 
visible  church  and  a  state  founded  on  law  and  on 
force,  Roman  Catholicism  has  nothing  to  do  with 
the  Gospel,  nay,  is  in  fundamental  contradiction 
with  it.  That  this  state  has  borrowed  a  divine 
lustre  from  the  Gospel,  and  finds  this  lustre  extra- 
ordinarily advantageous,  cannot  avail  to  upset  the 
verdict.  To  mix  the  divine  with  the  secular,  and 
what  is  innermost  in  a  man  with  a  political  element, 
is  to  work  the  greatest  of  mischiefs,  because  the 
conscience  is  thereby  enslaved  and  religion  robbed 
of  its  solemn  character.  It  is  inevitable  that  this 
character  should  be  lost  when  every  possible  meas- 
ure which  serves  to  maintain  the  earthly  empire  of 
the  Church — for  example,  the  sovereignty  of  the 
Pope — is  proclaimed  as  the  divine  will.  We  are  re- 
minded, however,  that  it  is  just  this  independent 
action  on  the  part  of  the  Church  which  saves  re- 
ligion in  Western  Europe  from  entirely  degenerat- 
ing into  nationality,  or  the  state,  or  police.  The 
Church,  it  is  urged,  has  maintained  intact  the  high 

283 


284  What  is  Christianity  ? 

idea  of  the  complete  self-subsistence  of  religion  and 
its  independence  of  the  state.  We  may  admit  the 
claim,  but  the  price  which  Western  Europe  has  had 
to  pay  for  this  service,  and  still  pays,  is  much  too 
great;  by  having  to  pay  so  heavy  a  tribute,  the  na- 
tions are  threatened  with  bankruptcy  within  ;  and, 
as  for  the  Church,  the  capital  which  it  has  amassed 
is  truly  a  capital  that  consumes.  With  all  the  ap- 
parent increase  in  its  power,  a  pauperising  process 
is  slowly  being  accomplished  in  the  Church ;  slowly 
but  surely.  Let  me  here  digress  from  our  subject 
for  a  moment. 

No  one  who  looks  at  the  present  political  situa- 
tion can  have  any  ground  for  asserting  that  the 
power  of  the  Roman  Church  is  on  the  wane.  What 
a  growth  it  has  experienced  in  the  nineteenth  cent- 
ury !  And  yet — any  one  with  a  keen  eye  sees  that 
the  Church  is  far  from  possessing  now  such  a  pleni- 
tude of  power  as  it  enjoyed  in  the  twelfth  and  thir- 
teenth centuries,  when  all  the  material  and  spiritual 
forces  available  were  at  its  disposal.  Since  that 
epoch  its  power  has,  in  point  of  intensity,  suffered 
an  enormous  decline,  arrested  by  a  few  brief  out- 
bursts of  enthusiasm  between  1540  and  1620,  and  in 
the  nineteenth  century.  Earnest  CathoHcs,  con- 
cerned at  this  fact,  make  no  secret  of  it ;  they  know 
and  admit  that  an  important  portion  of  the  spiritual 
possessions  necessary  to  the  dominion  of  the  Church 


Roman  Catholicism  285 

has  been  lost  to  it.  And  again :  what  is  the  posi- 
tion of  the  Latin  nations  which,  when  all  is  said, 
form  the  proper  province  of  the  Roman  Church's 
rule  ?  There  is  only  one  of  them  which  can  really 
be  called  a  great  Power,  and  what  sort  of  spectacle 
will  it  present  in  another  generation  ?  As  a  state 
this  Church  lives  to-day,  to  a  not  inconsiderable  ex- 
tent, on  its  history,  its  old  Roman  and  mediaeval 
history;  —  and  it  lives  as  the  Roman  Empire  of  the 
Romans.  But  empires  do  not  live  for  ever.  Will 
the  Church  be  capable  of  maintaining  itself  in  the 
great  changes  to  come  ?  Will  it  bear  the  increasing 
tension  between  it  and  the  intellectual  life  of  the 
people  ?  Will  it  survive  the  decline  of  the  Latin 
nations  ? 

But  let  us  leave  this  question  to  answer  itself. 
Let  us  recollect,  rather,  that  this  Church,  thanks 
above  all  to  its  Augustinianism,  possesses  in  its 
orders  of  monkhood  and  its  religious  societies  a  deep 
element  of  life  in  its  midst.  In  all  ages  it  has  pro- 
duced saints,  so  far  as  men  can  be  so  called,  and  it 
still  produces  them  to-day.  Trust  in  God,  unaf- 
fected humility,  the  assurance  of  redemption,  the  de- 
votion of  one's  life  to  the  service  of  one's  brethren, 
are  to  be  found  in  it;  many  brethren  take  up  the 
cross  of  Christ  and  exercise  at  one  and  the  same 
time  that  self-judgment  and  that  joy  in  God  which 
Paul  and  Augustine  achieved.    The  Imitatio  Christi 


286  What  is  Christianity  ? 

kindles  independent  religious  life,  and  a  fire  which 
burns  with  a  flame  of  its  own.  Ecclesiasticism  has 
not  availed  to  suppress  the  power  of  the  Gospel, 
which,  in  spite  of  the  frightful  weight  that  it  has  to 
carry,  makes  its  way  again  and  again.  It  still  works 
like  leaven,  nor  can  we  fail  to  see  that  this  Church, 
side  by  side  with  a  lax  morality  for  which  it  has 
often  enough  been  to  blame,  has,  by  the  mouth  of 
its  great  mediaeval  theologians,  fruitfully  applied 
the  Gospel  to  many  circumstances  of  life  and 
created  a  Christian  ethics.  Here  and  elsewhere  it 
has  proved  that  it  not  only  carries,  as  it  were,  the 
thought  of  the  Gospel  with  it  as  a  river  carries 
grains  of  gold,  but  that  they  are  bound  up  with  it 
and  have  been  further  developed  in  it.  The  infalli- 
ble Pope,  the  **  Apostolico-Roman  polytheism," 
the  veneration  of  the  saints,  blind  obedience,  and 
apathetic  devotion  —  these  things  seem  to  have 
stifled  all  inwardness,  and  yet  there  are  Christians 
still  to  be  found  in  this  Church,  too,  of  the  kind 
which  the  Gospel  has  awakened,  earnest  and  loving, 
filled  with  joy  and  peace  in  God.  Lastly,  the  mis- 
chief is  not  that  the  Gospel  has  been  bound  up  with 
political  forms  at  all, — Melanchthon  was  no  traitor 
when  he  expressed  his  willingness  to  acknowledge 
the  Pope  if  he  would  permit  the  Gospel  to  be 
preached  in  its  purity, — but  it  lies  in  the  sanctifica- 
tion  of  the  political  element,  and  in  the  inability  of 


Protestantism  287 

this  Church  to  get  rid  of  what  was  once  of  service 
in  particular  historical  circumstances,  but  has  now 
become  an  obstruction  and  a  clog. 

We  now  pass  to  the  last  section  in  the  exposition 
of  our  subject. 

THE   CHRISTIAN   RELIGION   IN   PROTESTANTISM 

Anyone  who  looks  at  the  external  condition  of 
Protestantism,  especially  in  Germany,  may,  at  first 
sight,  well  exclaim  :  **  What  a  miserable  spectacle!  " 
But  no  one  can  survey  the  history  of  Europe  from 
the  second  century  to  the  present  time  without  be- 
ing forced  to  the  conclusion  that  in  the  whole  course 
of  this  history  the  greatest  movement  and  the  one 
most  pregnant  with  good  was  the  Reformation  in 
the  sixteenth  century ;  even  the  great  change  which 
took  place  at  the  transition  to  the  nineteenth  is 
inferior  to  it  in  importance.  What  do  all  our  dis- 
coveries and  inventions  and  our  advances  in  outward 
civilisation  signify  in  comparison  with  the  fact  that 
to-day  there  are  thirty  millions  of  Germans,  and 
many  more  millions  of  Christians  outside  Germany, 
who  possess  a  religion  without  priests,  without 
sacrifices,  without  "  fragments"  of  grace,  without 
ceremonies — a  spiritual  religion  ! 

Protestantism  must  be  understood,  first  and  fore- 
most, by  the  contrast  which  it  offers  to  Catholicism, 
and   here   there   is   a   double    direction    which    any 


288  What  is  Christianity  ? 

estimate  of  it  must  take,  first  as  Reformation  and  sec- 
ondly as  Revolution.  It  was  a  reformation  in  regard 
to  the  doctrine  of  salvation ;  a  revolution  in  regard 
to  the  Church,  its  authority,  and  its  apparatus. 
Hence  Protestantism  is  no  spontaneous  phenom- 
enon, created  as  it  were  by  a  ''generatio  equivoca"  ; 
but,  as  its  very  name  implies,  it  was  called  into  be- 
ing by  the  misdeeds  of  the  Roman  Church  having 
become  intolerable.  It  was  the  close  of  a  long 
series  of  cognate  but  ineffectual  attempts  at  reform 
in  the  Middle  Ages.  If  the  position  which  it  thus 
holds  in  history  proves  its  continuity  with  the  past, 
the  fact  is  still  more  strongly  in  evidence  in  its  own 
and  not  inappropriate  contention  that  it  was  not  an 
innovation  in  regard  to  religion,  but  a  restoration 
and  renewal  of  it.  But  from  the  point  of  view  of 
the  Church  and  its  authority  Protestantism  was  un- 
doubtedly a  revolutionary  phenomenon.  We  must, 
then,  take  account  of  it  in  both  these  relations. 

Protestantism  was  a  Reformation,  that  is  to  say,  a 
renewal,  as  regards  the  core  of  the  matter,  as  re- 
gards religion,  and  consequently  as  regards  the  doc- 
trine of  salvation.  That  may  be  shown  in  the  main 
in  three  points. 

In  the  first  place,  religion  was  here  brought  back 
again  to  itself,  in  so  far  as  the  Gospel  and  the  cor- 
responding religious  experience  were  put  into  the 
foreground  and  freed  of  all  alien  accretions.     Re- 


Protestantism  289 

ligion  was  taken  out  of  the  vast  and  monstrous  fab- 
ric which  had  been  previously  called  by  its  name — 
a  fabric  embracing  the  Gospel  and  holy  water,  the 
priesthood  of  all  believers  and  the  Pope  on  his 
throne,  Christ  the  Redeemer  and  St.  Anne — and 
was  reduced  to  its  essential  factors,  to  the  Word  of 
God  and  to  faith.  This  truth  was  imposed  as  a 
criterion  on  everything  that  also  claimed  to  be  "  re- 
ligion "  and  to  unite  on  terms  of  equality  with  those 
great  factors.  In  the  history  of  religions  every 
really  important  reformation  is  always,  first  and 
foremost,  a  critical  reduction  to  principles;  for,  in 
the  course  of  its  historical  development,  religion,  by 
adapting  itself  to  circumstances,  attracts  to  itself 
much  alien  matter,  and  produces,  in  conjunction 
with  this,  a  number  of  hybrid  and  apocryphal  ele- 
ments, which  it  is  necessarily  compelled  to  place 
under  the  protection  of  what  is  sacred.  If  it  is  not 
to  run  wild  from  exuberance,  or  be  choked  by  its 
own  dry  leaves,  the  reformer  must  come  who  puri- 
fies it  and  brings  it  back  to  itself.  This  critical  re- 
duction to  principles  Luther  accomplished  in  the 
sixteenth  century,  by  victoriously  declaring  that 
the  Christian  religion  was  given  only  in  the  Word  of 
God  and  in  the  inward  experience  which  accords 
with  this  Word. 

In  the  second  "^X-diCQ,  there  was  the  definite  way  in 
which  the  "  Word  of  God  "  and  the  "  experience  " 


290  What  is  Christianity  ? 

of  it  were  grasped.  For  Luther  the  *'  Word  "  did 
not  mean  Church  doctrine;  it  did  not  even  mean 
the  Bible ;  it  meant  the  message  of  the  free  grace  of 
God  in  Christ  which  makes  guilty  and  despairing 
men  happy  and  blessed  ;  and  the  **  experience  "  was 
just  the  certainty  of  this  grace.  In  the  sense  in 
which  Luther  took  them,  both  can  be  embraced  in 
one  phrase :  t/te  confident  belief  in  a  God  of  grace. 
They  put  an  end — such  was  his  own  experience,  and 
such  was  what  he  taught — to  all  inner  discord  in  a 
man;  they  overcome  the  burden  of  every  ill;  they 
destroy  the  sense  of  guilt ;  and,  despite  the  imper- 
fection of  a  man's  own  acts,  they  give  him  the  cert- 
ainty of  being  inseparably  united  with  the  holy 
God: 

Now  I  know  and  believe 

And  give  praise  without  end 
That  God  the  Almighty 

Is  Father  and  Friend, 
And  that  in  all  troubles, 

Whatever  betide. 
He  hushes  the  tempest 

And  stands  at  my  side. 

Nothing,  he  taught,  is  to  be  preached  but  the 
God  of  grace,  with  whom  we  are  reconciled  through 
Christ.  Conversely,  it  is  not  a  question  of  ecstasies 
and  visions ;  no  transports  of  feeling  are  necessary ; 
it  \s  faith  that  is  to  be  aroused.  Faith  is  to  be  the 
beginning,  middle,  and  end  of  all  religious  fervour. 
In  the  correspondence  of  Word  and  faith  **  justifi- 


Protestantism  291 

cation "  is  experienced,  and  hence  justification 
holds  the  chief  place  in  the  Reformers'  message ;  it 
means  nothing  less  than  the  attainment  of  peace 
and  freedom  in  God  through  Christ,  dominion  over 
the  world,  and  an  eternity  within. 

Lastly,  the  third  feature  of  this  renewal  was  the 
great  transformation  which  God 's  worship  now  in- 
evitably underwent,  God's  worship  by  the  individ- 
ual and  by  the  community.  Such  worship — this 
was  obvious — can  and  ought  to  be  nothing  but  put- 
ting/<22V//  to  practical  proof.  As  Luther  declared 
over  and  over  again,  **  All  that  God  asks  of  us  is 
faith,  and  it  is  through  faith  alone  that  He  is  willing 
to  treat  with  us."  To  let  God  be  God,  and  to  pay 
Him  honour  by  acknowledging  and  invoking  Him  as 
Father — it  is  thus  alone  that  a  man  can  serve  Him. 
Every  other  path  on  which  a  man  tries  to  approach 
Him  and  honour  Him  leads  astray,  and  vain  is  the 
attempt  to  establish  any  other  relation  with  Him. 
What  an  enormous  mass  of  anxious,  hopeful,  and 
hopeless  effort  was  now  done  away  with,  and  what 
a  revolution  in  worship  was  effected !  But  all  that 
is  true  of  God's  worship  by  the  individual  is  true  in 
exactly  the  same  way  of  public  worship.  Here,  too, 
it  is  only  the  Word  of  God  and  prayer  which  have 
any  place.  All  else  is  to  be  banished;  the  com- 
munity assembled  for  God's  worship  is  to  proclaim 
the  message  of  God  with  praise  and  thanksgiving. 


292  What  is  Christianity  ? 

and  call  upon  His  name.  Anything  that  goes  be- 
yond this  is  not  worship  at  all. 

These  three  points  embrace  the  chief  elements  in 
the  Reformation.  What  they  involved  was  a  re- 
newal of  religion ;  for  not  only  do  they  denote, 
albeit  in  a  fashion  of  their  own,  a  return  to  Christ- 
ianity as  it  originally  was,  but  they  also  existed 
themselves  in  Western  Catholicism,  although  buried 
in  a  heap  of  rubbish. 

But,  before  we  go  further,  permit  me  two  brief 
digressions.  We  were  just  saying  that  the  com- 
munity assembled  for  God's  worship  must  not  sol- 
emnise its  worship  in  any  other  way  than  by 
proclaiming  the  Word  and  by  prayer.  To  this, 
however,  we  must  add,  according  to  the  Reformers' 
injunctions,  that  all  that  is  to  stamp  this  commun- 
ity as  a  Church  is  its  existence  as  a  community  of 
the  faith  in  which  God's  Word  is  preached  aright. 
Here  we  may  leave  the  sacraments  out  of  account, 
as,  according  to  Luther,  they,  too,  derive  their  en- 
tire importance  from  the  Word.  But  if  Word  and 
faith  are  the  only  characteristics  of  worship,  it  looks 
as  if  those  who  contend  that  the  Reformation  did 
away  with  the  visible  Church  and.  put  an  invisible 
one  in  its  place  were  right.  But  the  contention  does 
not  tally  with  the  facts.  The  distinction  between 
a  visible  and  an  invisible  Church  dates  back  as  far 
as  the   Middle  Ages,   or  even,   from   one  point   of 


Protestantism  293 

view,  as  far  as  Augustine.  Those  who  defined  the 
true  Church  as  "  the  number  of  the  predestined  " 
were  obh'ged  to  maintain  that  it  was  wholly  invisi- 
ble. But  the  German  Reformers  did  not  so  define 
it.  In  declaring  the  Church  to  be  a  community  of 
the  faith  in  which  God's  Word  is  preached  aright, 
they  rejected  all  the  coarser  characteristics  of  a 
Church,  and  certainly  excluded  the  visibility  that 
appeals  to  the  senses;  but — to  take  an  illustration 
— who  would  say  that  an  intellectual  community, 
for  example,  a  band  of  young  men  all  alike  eagerly 
devoted  to  knowledge  or  the  interests  of  their  coun- 
try, was  **  invisible,"  because  it  possesses  no  ex- 
ternal characteristics,  and  cannot  be  counted  on 
one's  fingers  ?  Just  as  little  is  the  evangelical 
Church  an  **  invisible  "  community.  It  is  a  com- 
munity of  the  spirit,  and  therefore  its  **  visibility" 
takes  different  phases  and  different  degrees  of 
strength.  There  are  phases  of  it  where  it  is  ab- 
solutely unrecognisable,  and  others,  again,  where  it 
stands  forth  with  the  energy'  of  a  power  that  appeals 
to  the  senses.  It  can  never,  indeed,  take  the  sharp 
contours  of  a  state  like  the  Venetian  republic  or  the 
kingdom  of  France, — such  was  the  comparison  which 
a  great  exponent  of  Catholic  dogmatics  declared 
to  be  applicable  to  his  Church, — but  as  Protestants 
we  ought  to  know  that  we  belong,  not  to  an  "  in- 
visible "    Church,    but    to   a   spiritual   community 


294  What  is  Christianity  ? 

which  disposes  of  the  forces  pertaining  to  spiritual 
communities;  a  spiritual  community  resting  on 
earth,  but  reaching  to  the  Eternal. 

And  now  as  to  the  other  point :  Protestantism 
maintains  that,  objectively,  the  Christian  commun- 
ity is  based  upon  the  Gospel  alone,  but  that  the 
Gospel  is  contained  in  Holy  Scripture.  From  the 
very  beginning  it  has  encountered  the  objection 
that,  if  that  be  so,  and  at  the  same  time  there  be 
no  recognised  authority  to  decide  what  the  purport 
and  meaning  of  the  Gospel  is  and  how  it  is  to  be  as- 
certained from  the  Scriptures,  general  confusion  will 
be  the  result ;  that  of  this  confusion  the  history  of 
Protestantism  affords  ample  testimony;  that  if 
every  man  has  a  warrant  to  decide  what  the  **  true 
understanding  "  of  the  Gospel  is,  and  in  this  respect 
is  bound  to  no  tradition,  no  council,  and  no  pope, 
but  exercises  the  free  right  of  research,  any  unity, 
community,  or  Church  is  absolutely  impossible; 
that  the  state,  therefore,  must  interfere,  or  some 
arbitrary  limit  be  fixed.  That  no  Church  possess- 
ing the  Sacred  Office  of  the  Inquisition  can  arise  in 
this  way  is  certainly  true;  further,  that  to  impose 
any  external  Vimits  on  a  community /r^;^  t/ie  inside 
is  a  simple  impossibility.  What  has  been  done  by 
the  state  or  under  pressure  of  historical  necessities 
does  not  affect  the  question  at  all;  the  structures 
which  have  arisen  in  this  way  are,  in  the  evangelical 


Protestantism  295 

sense,  only  figuratively  called  **  Churches."  Pro- 
testayitism  reckons — this  is  the  solution — upon  the 
Gospel  being  something  so  simple,  so  divine^  and  there- 
fore so  truly  hzanan,  as  to  be  most  certain  of  being  un- 
derstood when  it  is  left  entirely  free,  and  also  as  to 
produce  essentially  the  same  experiences  and  convic- 
tions in  individual  souls.  In  this  it  may  often 
enough  make  mistakes ;  differences  of  individuality 
and  education  may  issue  in  very  heterogeneous  re- 
sults; but  still,  in  this  its  attitude,  it  has  not  up  to 
now  been  put  to  shame.  A  real,  spiritual  com- 
munity of  evangelical  Christians;  a  common  con- 
viction as  to  what  is  most  important  and  as  to  its 
application  to  life  in  all  its  forms,  has  arisen  and  is 
in  full  force  and  vigour.  This  community  embraces 
Protestants  in  and  outside  Germany,  Lutherans, 
Calvinists,  and  adherents  of  other  denominations. 
In  all  of  them,  so  far  as  they  are  earnest  Christians, 
there  lives  a  common  element,  and  this  element  is 
of  infinitely  greater  importance  and  value  than  all 
their  differences.  It  keeps  us  to  the  Gospel  and  it 
protects  us  from  modern  heathenism  and  from  re- 
lapse into  Catholicism.  More  than  this  we  do  not 
need ;  nay,  any  other  fetter  we  reject.  This,  how- 
ever, is  no  fetter,  but  the  condition  of  our  freedom. 
And  when  we  are  reproached  with  our  divisions  and 
told  that  Protestantism  has  as  many  doctrines  as 
heads,  we  reply:  "  So  it  has,  but  we  do  not  wish  it 


296  What  is  Christianity  ? 

otherwise ;  on  the  contrary,  we  want  still  more  free- 
dom, still  greater  individuality  in  utterance  and  in 
doctrine ;  the  historical  circumstances  necessitating 
the  formation  of  national  and  free  churches  have 
imposed  only  too  many  rules  and  limitations  upon 
us,  even  though  they  be  not  proclaimed  as  divine 
ordinances;  we  want  still  more  confidence  in  the 
inner  strength  and  unifying  power  of  the  Gospel, 
which  is  more  certain  to  prevail  in  free  conflict  than 
under  guardianship ;  we  want  to  be  a  spiritual  realm 
and  we  have  no  desire  to  return  to  the  fleshpots  of 
Egypt ;  we  are  well  aware  that  in  the  interests  of 
order  and  instruction  outward  and  visible  commun- 
ities must  arise ;  we  are  ready  to  foster  their  growth, 
so  far  as  they  fulfil  these  aims  and  deserve  to  be 
fostered ;  but  we  do  not  hang  our  hearts  upon  them, 
for  they  may  exist  to-day  and  to-morrow  give  place, 
under  other  political  or  social  conditions,  to  new  or- 
ganisations ;  let  anyone  who  has  such  a  Church  have 
it  as  though  he  had  it  not ;  our  Church  is  not  the 
particular  Church  in  which  we  are  placed,  but  the 
*  societas  fidei '  which  has  its  members  everywhere, 
even  among  Greeks  and  Romans."  That  is  the 
evangelical  answer  to  the  reproach  that  we  are 
"  divided,"  and  that  is  the  language  which  the  lib- 
erty that  has  been  given  to  us  employs.  Let  us 
now  return  from  these  digressions  to  the  exposition 
of  the  essential  features  of  Protestantism. 


Protestantism  297 

Protestantism  was  not  only  a  Reformation  but 
also  a  Revohition.  From  the  legal  point  of  view 
the  whole  Church  system  against  which  Luther  re- 
volted could  lay  claim  to  full  obedience.  It  had 
just  as  much  legal  validity  in  Western  Europe  as 
the  laws  of  the  state  themselves.  When  Luther 
burnt  the  papal  bull  he  undoubtedly  performed  a 
revolutionary  act  —  revolutionary,  not  in  the  bad 
sense  of  a  revolt  against  legal  ordinance  which  is 
also  moral  ordinance  as  well,  but  certainly  in  the 
sense  of  a  violent  breach  with  a  given  legal  condi- 
tion. It  was  against  this  state  of  things  that  the 
new  movement  was  directed,  and  it  was  to  the  fol- 
lowing chief  points  that  its  protest  in  word  and  deed 
extended.  Firstly :  It  protested  against  the  entire 
hierarchical  and  priestly  system  in  the  Church,  de- 
manded that  it  should  be  abolished,  and  abolished 
it  in  favour  of  a  common  priesthood  and  an  estab- 
lished order  formed  on  the  basis  of  the  congrega- 
tion. What  a  range  this  demand  had,  and  to  what 
an  extent  it  interfered  with  the  previously  existing 
state  of  things,  cannot  be  told  in  a  few  sentences. 
To  explain  it  all  would  take  hours.  Nor  can  we 
here  show  how  the  various  arrangements  actually 
took  shape  in  the  evangelical  Churches.  That  is  not 
a  matter  of  fundamental  importance,  but  what  is  of 
fundamental  importance  is  that  the  **  divine  "  rights 
of  the  Church  were  abolished. 


298  What  is  Christianity  ? 

Secondly :  It  protested  against  all  formal,  exter- 
nal authority  in  religion;  against  the  authority, 
therefore,  of  councils,  priests,  and  the  whole  tradi- 
tion of  the  Church.  That  alone  is  to  be  authority 
which  shows  itself  to  be  such  within  and  effects  a 
deliverance;  the  thing  itself,  therefore,  the  Gospel. 
Thus  Luther  also  protested  against  the  authority  of 
the  letter  of  the  Bible ;  but  we  shall  see  that  this 
was  a  point  on  which  neither  he  nor  the  rest  of  the 
Reformers  were  quite  clear,  and  where  they  failed 
to  draw  the  conclusions  which  their  insight  into 
fundamentals  demanded. 

Thirdly:  It  protested  against  all  the  traditional 
arrangements  for  public  worship,  all  ritualism,  and 
every  sort  of  **  holy  work."  As  it  neither  knows 
nor  tolerates,  as  we  have  seen,  any  specific  form  of 
worship,  any  material  sacrifice  and  service  to  God, 
any  mass  and  any  works  done  for  God  and  with  a 
view  to  salvation,  the  whole  traditional  system  of 
public  worship,  with  its  pomp,  its  holy  and  semi- 
holy  articles,  its  gestures  and  processions,  came  to 
the  ground.  How  much  could  be  retained  in  the 
way  of  form  for  cBsthetic  or  educational  reasons  was, 
in  comparison  with  this,  a  question  of  entirely  sec- 
ondary importance. 

Fourthly:  It  protested  against  sacramentalism. 
Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper  it  left  standing,  as 
institutions  of  the  primitive  Church,  or,  as  it  might 


Protestantism  299 

be,  of  the  Lord  himself;  but  it  desired  that  they 
should  be  regarded  either  as  symbols  and  marks  by 
which  the  Christian  is  known,  or  as  acts  deriving 
their  value  exclusively  from  that  message  of  the 
forgiveness  of  sins  which  is  bound  up  with  them. 
All  other  sacraments  it  abolished,  and  with  them 
the  whole  notion  of  God's  grace  and  help  being  ac- 
cessible in  bits,  and  fused  in  some  mysterious  way 
with  definite  corporeal  things.  To  sacramentaHsm 
it  opposed  the  Word ;  and  to  the  notion  that  grace 
was  given  by  bits,  the  conviction  that  there  is  only 
one  grace,  namely,  to  possess  God  Himself  as  the 
source  of  grace.  It  was  not  because  Luther  was  so 
very  enlightened  that  in  his  tract  "  On  the  Babylon- 
ian Captivity  "  he  rejected  the  whole  system  of 
sacramentalism, — he  had  enough  superstition  left  in 
him  to  enable  him  to  advance  some  very  shocking 
contentions, — but  because  he  had  had  inner  experi- 
ence of  the  fact  that  where  **  grace  "  does  not  en- 
dow the  soul  with  the  living  God  Himself  it  is  an 
illusion.  Hence  for  him  the  whole  doctrine  of  sacra- 
mentalism was  an  infringement  of  God's  majesty 
and  an  enslavement  of  the  soul. 

Fifthly :  It  protested  against  the  double  form  of 
morality,  and  accordingly  against  the  higher  form ; 
against  the  contention  that  it  is  particularly  well- 
pleasing  to  God  to  make  no  use  of  the  powers  and 
gifts  which  are  part  of   creation.     The  Reformers 


300  What  is  Christianity  ? 

had  a  strong  sense  of  the  fact  that  the  world  passes 
away  with  the  lusts  thereof;  we  must  certainly  not 
represent  Luther  as  the  modern  man  cheerfully 
standing  with  his  feet  firmly  planted  on  the  earth ; 
on  the  contrary,  like  the  men  of  the  Middle  Ages, 
he  had  a  strong  yearning  to  be  rid  of  this  world  and 
to  depart  from  the  "  vale  of  tears."  But  because 
he  was  convinced  that  we  neither  can  nor  ought  to 
offer  God  anything  but  trust  in  Him,  he  arrived,  in 
regard  to  the  Christian's  position  in  the  world,  at 
quite  different  theses  from  those  which  were  ad- 
vanced by  the  grave  monks  of  previous  centuries. 
As  fastings  and  ascetic  practices  had  no  value  be- 
fore God,  and  were  of  no  advantage  to  one's  fellow- 
men,  and  as  God  is  the  Creator  of  all  things,  the 
most  useful  thing  that  a  man  can  do  is  to  remain  in 
the  position  in  which  God  has  placed  him.  This 
conviction  gave  Luther  a  cheerful  and  confident 
view  of  earthly  ordinances,  which  contrasts  with, 
and  actually  got  the  upper  hand  of,  his  inclination 
to  turn  his  back  upon  the  world. 

He  advanced  the  definite  thesis  that  all  positions 
in  life — constituted  authority,  the  married  state, 
and  so  on,  down  to  domestic  service — existed  by 
the  will  of  God,  and  were  therefore  genuinely  spirit- 
ual positions  in  which  we  are  to  serve  God ;  a  faith- 
ful maid-servant  stands  higher,  with  him,  than  a 
contemplative  monk.     Christians  are  not  to  be  al- 


Protestantism  301 

ways  devising  how  they  may  find  some  new  paths 
of  their  own,  but  to  show  patience  and  love  of 
neighbour  within  the  sphere  of  their  given  vocation. 
Out  of  this  there  grew  up  in  his  mind  the  notion 
that  all  worldly  laws  and  spheres  of  activity  have 
an  independent  title.  It  is  not  that  they  are  to  be 
merely  tolerated,  and  have  no  right  to  exist  until 
they  receive  it  from  the  Church.  No!  they  have 
rights  of  their  own,  and  they  form  the  vast  domain 
in  which  the  Christian  is  to  give  proof  of  his  faith 
and  love;  nay,  they  are  even  to  be  respected  in 
places  which  are  as  yet  ignorant  of  God's  revelation 
in  the  Gospel. 

It  was  thus  that  the  same  man  who  asked  nothing 
of  the  world,  so  far  as  his  own  personal  feelings 
were  concerned,  and  whose  soul  was  troubled  only 
by  thought  for  the  Eternal,  delivered  mankind  from 
the  ban  of  asceticism.  He  was  thereby  really  and 
truly  the  life  and  origin  of  a  new  epoch,  and  he 
gave  it  back  a  simple  and  unconstrained  attitude 
towards  the  world,  and  a  good  conscience  in  all 
earthly  labour.  This  fruitful  work  fell  to  his  share, 
not  because  he  secularised  religion,  but  because  he 
took  it  so  seriously  and  so  profoundly  that,  while  in 
his  view  it  was  to  pervade  all  things,  it  was  itself  to 
be  freed  from  everything  external  to  it. 


LECTURE   XVI 

THE  question  has  often  been  raised  whether,  and 
to  what  extent,  the  Reformation  was  a  work 
of  the  German  spirit.  I  cannot  here  go  into  this 
complicated  problem.  But  this  much  seems  to  me 
to  be  certain,  that  while  we  cannot,  indeed,  connect 
Luther's  momentous  religious  experiences  with  his 
nationality,  the  results  positive  as  well  as  negative 
with  which  he  invested  them  display  the  German — 
the  German  man  and  German  history.  From  the 
time  that  the  Germans  endeavoured  to  make  them- 
selves really  at  home  in  the  religion  handed  down 
to  them — this  did  not  take  place  until  the  thirteenth 
century  onwards — they  were  preparing  the  way  for 
the  Reformation.  And  just  as  Eastern  Christianity 
is  rightly  called  Greek,  and  the  Christianity  of  the 
Middle  Ages  and  of  Western  Europe  is  rightly 
called  Roman,  so  the  Christianity  of  the  Reforma- 
tion maybe  described  as  German,  in  spite  of  Calvin. 
For  Calvin  was  Luther's  pupil,  and  he  made  his  in- 
fluence most  lastingly  felt,  not  among  the  Latin 
nations  but  among  the  English,  the  Scotch,  and  the 
Dutch.     Through  the   Reformation   the   Germans 

302 


Protestantism  303 

mark  a  stage  in  the  history  of  the  Universal  Church. 
No  similar  statement  can  be  made  of  the  Slavs. 

The  recoil  from  asceticism,  which  as  an  ideal 
never  penetrated  the  Germans  to  the  same  extent  as 
other  nations,  and  the  protest  against  religion  as  ex- 
ternal authority,  are  to  be  set  down  as  well  to  the 
Pauline  Gospel  as  to  the  German  spirit.  Luther's 
warmth  and  heartiness  in  preaching,  and  his  frank- 
ness in  polemical  utterance,  were  felt  by  the  Ger- 
man nation  to  be  an  opening  out  of  its  own  soul. 

In  the  previous  lecture  we  touched  upon  the  chief 
provinces  in  which  Luther  raised  an  emphatic  and 
still  effective  protest.  There  is  much  upon  which  I 
could  also  dwell :  for  example,  upon  the  opposition 
which,  especially  at  the  commencement  of  his 
reforming  activity,  he  offered  to  the  whole  termino- 
logy of  dogmatics,  its  formulae  and  doctrinal  utter- 
ances. To  sum  up :  he  protested,  because  his  aim 
was  to  restore  the  Christian  religion  in  its  purity, 
without  priests  and  sacrifices,  without  external  au- 
thorities and  ordinances,  without  solemn  ceremo- 
nies, without  all  the  chains  with  which  the  Beyond 
was  to  be  bound  to  the  Here.  In  its  revising  ardour 
the  Reformation  went  back  not  only  earlier  than 
the  eleventh  century,  not  only  earlier  than  the 
fourth  or  the  second,  but  to  the  very  beginnings  of 
religion.      Nay,    without    being   aware    of    it,    the 


304  What  is  Christianity  ? 

Reformation  even  modified  or  entirely  put  aside 
forms  which  existed  even  in  the  apostolic  age ;  thus 
in  matters  of  discipline  it  abolished  fasting;  in  mat- 
ters of  constitution  it  abolished  bishops  and  deacons; 
in  matters  of  doctrine  it  abolished,  among  other 
things,  Chiliasm. 

But  with  the  change  effected  by  Reformation 
and  Revolution,  how  does  the  new  creation  stand  as 
a  whole  in  regard  to  the  Gospel  ?  We  may  say  that 
in  the  four  leading  points  which  we  emphasised  in 
the  previous  lecture — inwardness  and  spirituality, 
the  fundamental  thought  of  the  God  of  grace,  His 
worship  in  spirit  and  in  truth,  and  the  idea  of  the 
Church  as  a  community  of  faith — the  Gospel  was  in 
reality  re-won.  Need  I  prove  this  in  detail,  or  are 
we  to  be  shaken  in  our  conviction  because,  as  is 
surely  the  case,  a  Christian  in  the  sixteenth  and  in 
the  nineteenth  century  presents  an  appearance  dif- 
ferent from  that  which  a  Christian  presented  in  the 
first  ?  That  the  inwardness  and  individualism  which 
the  Reformation  disengaged  accord  with  the  char- 
acter of  the  Gospel  is  certain.  Further,  Luther's 
pronouncement  on  justification  not  only  reflects  in 
the  main,  and  in  spite  of  certain  irreducible  differ- 
ences, Paul's  train  of  thought,  but  is  also,  in  point 
of  aim,  in  exact  correspondence  with  Jesus'  teach- 
ing.    To  know  God  as  one's  Father,  to  possess  a 


Protestantism  305 

God  of  grace,  to  find  comfort  in  His  grace  and 
providence,  to  believe  in  the  forgiveness  of  sins — in 
both  cases  that  is  the  point  on  which  everything 
turns.  And  in  the  troubled  times  of  Lutheran 
orthodoxy  a  Paul  Gerhardt  succeeded  in  giving  such 
grand  expression  -to  this  fundamental  conviction  of 
the  Gospel  in  his  hymns,  "  Is  God  for  me,  then  let 
all,"  and  "  Commit  thy  ways,"  as  to  convince  us 
how  truly  Protestantism  was  penetrated  with  it. 
Again,  that  the  right  worship  of  God  ought  to  be 
nothing  but  the  acknowledgment  of  God  in  praise 
and  prayer,  but  that  the  love  of  neighbour  is  also 
worship,  is  taken  direct  from  the  Gospel  and  Paul's 
corresponding  injunctions.  Lastly,  that  the  true 
Church  is  held  together  by  the  Holy  Ghost  and  by 
faith;  that  it  is  a  spiritual  community  of  brothers 
and  sisters,  is  a  conviction  which  is  in  line  with  the 
Gospel,  and  was  most  clearly  expressed  by  Paul. 
In  so  far  as  the  Reformation  restored  all  this,  and 
also  recognised  Christ  as  the  only  Redeemer,  it 
may  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  word  be  called 
evangelical ;  and  in  so  far  as  these  convictions,  crip- 
pled and  burdened  though  they  may  be,  retain  their 
ascendency  in  the  Protestant  Churches,  they  have 
every  warrant  for  being  so  described. 

But  what  was  here  achieved  had  its  dark  side  as 
well.     If  we  ask  what  the  Reformation  cost  us,  and 


3o6  What  is  Christianity  ? 

to  what    extent  it  made  its  principles  prevail,  we 
shall  see  this  dark  side  very  clearly. 

We  get  nothing  from  history  without  paying  for 
it,  and  for  a  violent  movement  we  have  to  pay 
double.  What  did  the  Reformation  cost  us  ?  I 
will  not  speak  of  the  fact  that  the  unity  of  Western 
civilisation  was  destroyed,  since  it  was,  after  all,  only 
over  a  part  of  Western  Europe  that  the  Reform- 
ation prevailed,  for  the  freedom  and  many-sided 
character  of  the  resulting  development  brought  us  a 
greater  gain.  But  the  necessity  of  establishing  the 
new  Churches  as  State-Churches  was  attended  by 
serious  disadvantages.  The  system  of  an  ecclesi- 
astical state  is,  of  course,  worse,  and  its  adherents 
have  truly  no  cause  to  praise  it  in  contrast  with  the 
State-Churches.  But  still  the  latter — which  are 
not  solely  the  outcome  of  the  breach  with  ecclesi- 
astical authority,  but  were  already  prepared  for  in 
the  fifteenth  century — have  been  the  cause  of  much 
stunted  growth.  They  have  weakened  the  feeling 
of  responsibility,  and  diminished  the  activity,  of 
the  evangelical  communities;  and,  in  addition,  they 
have  aroused  the  not  unfounded  suspicion  that  the 
Church  is  an  institution  set  up  by  the  state,  and 
accordingly  to  be  adjusted  to  the  state.  Much  has 
happened,  indeed,  in  the  last  few  decades  to  check 
that  suspicion  by  the  greater  independence  which  the 
Churches  have  obtained ;    but  further  progress   in 


Protestantism  307 

this  direction  is  necessary,  especially  in  regard  to 
the  freedom  of  individual  communities.  The  con- 
nexion with  the  state  must  not  be  violently  severed, 
for  the  Churches  have  derived  much  advantage  from 
it ;  but  steps  must  be  taken  to  further  the  develop- 
ment upon  which  we  have  entered.  If  this  results 
in  multifarious  organisations  in  the  Church,  it  will 
do  no  harm ;  on  the  contrary,  it  will  remind  us,  in  a 
forcible  way,  that  these  forms  are  all  arbitrary. 

Further,  Protestantism  was  forced  by  its  opposi- 
tion to  Catholicism  to  lay  exclusive  emphasis  on 
the  inward  character  of  religion,  and  upon  **  faith 
alone  " ;  but  to  formulate  one  doctrine  in  sharp  op- 
position to  another  is  always  a  dangerous  process. 
The  man  in  the  street  is  not  sorry  to  hear  that 
**  good  works  "  are  unnecessary,  nay,  that  they  con- 
stitute a  danger  to  the  soul.  Although  Luther  is 
not  responsible  for  the  convenient  misunderstanding 
that  ensued,  the  inevitable  result  was  that  in  the 
reformed  Churches  in  Germany  from  the  very  start 
there  were  accusations  of  moral  laxity  and  a  want  of 
serious  purpose  in  the  sanctification  of  life.  The 
saying,  "  If  ye  love  me,  keep  my  commandments," 
was  unwarrantably  thrust  into  the  background.  Not 
until  the  Pietistic  movement  arose  was  its  central 
importance  once  more  recognised.  Up  till  then  the 
pendulum  of  the  conduct  of  life  took  a  suspicious 
swing  in  the  contrary  direction,  out  of  opposition  to 


3o8  What  is  Christianity  ? 

the  Catholic  "  justification  by  works."  But  religion 
is  not  only  a  state  of  the  heart ;  it  is  a  deed  as  well ; 
it  is  faith  active  in  love  and  in  the  sanctification  of 
life.  This  is  a  truth  with  which  evangelical  Christ- 
ians must  become  much  better  acquainted,  if  they 
are  not  to  be  put  to  shame. 

There  is  another  point  closely  connected  with 
what  I  have  just  mentioned.  The  Reformation 
abolished  monasticism,  and  was  bound  to  abolish  it. 
It  rightly  affirmed  that  to  take  a  vow  of  lifelong 
asceticism  was  a  piece  of  presumption ;  and  it  rightly 
considered  that  any  worldly  vocation,  conscien- 
tiously followed,  in  the  sight  of  God  was  equal  to, 
nay,  was  better  than,  being  a  monk.  But  some- 
thing now  happened  which  Luther  neither  foresaw 
nor  desired:  "monasticism,"  of  the  kind  that  is 
conceivable  and  necessary  in  the  evangelical  sense 
of  the  word,  disappeared  altogether.  But  every 
community  stands  in  need  of  personalities  living 
exclusively  for  its  ends.  The  Church,  for  instance, 
needs  volunteers  who  will  abandon  every  other  pur- 
suit, renounce  **  the  world,"  and  devote  themselves 
entirely  to  the  service  of  their  neighbour;  not  be- 
cause such  a  vocation  is  **  a  higher  one,"  but  be- 
cause it  is  a  necessary  one,  and  because  no  Church 
can  live  without  also  giving  rise  to  this  desire. 
But  in  the  evangelical  Churches  the  desire  has 
been  checked  by  the  decided  attitude  which  they 


Protestantism  309 

have  been  compelled  to  adopt  towards  Catholicism. 
It  is  a  high  price  that  we  have  paid ;  nor  can  the 
price  be  reduced  by  considering,  on  the  other  hand, 
how  much  simple  and  unaffected  religious  fervour 
has  been  kindled  in  home  and  family  life.  We  may 
rejoice,  however,  that  in  the  past  century  a  begin- 
ning has  been  made  in  the  direction  of  recouping 
this  loss.  In  the  institution  of  deaconesses  and 
many  cognate  phenomena  the  evangelical  Churches 
are  getting  back  what  they  once  ejected  through 
their  inability  to  recognise  it  in  the  form  which  it 
then  took.  But  it  must  undergo  a  much  ampler 
and  more  varied  development. 

Not  only  had  the  Reformation  to  pay  a  high 
price ;  it  was  also  incapable  of  perceiving  all  the  con- 
clusions to  which  its  new  ideas  led,  and  of  giving 
them  pure  effect.  It  is  not  that  the  work  which  it 
did  was  not  absolutely  valid  and  permanent  in  every 
particular — how  could  that  be,  and  who  could  desire 
it  to  have  been  so  ?  No !  it  remained  stationary  in 
its  development  even  at  the  point  at  which,  to 
judge  by  the  earnest  foundation  that  was  laid  at 
the  start,  higher  things  might  have  been  expected. 
Various  causes  combined  to  produce  this  result. 
From  the  year  1526  onwards  national  Churches  had 
to  be  founded  at  headlong  speed  on  evangelical 
lines;  they  were  forced  to  be  "  rounded  and  com- 
plete" at  a  time  when  much  was  still  in  a  state  of 


3IO  What  is  Christianity? 

flux.  Then  again,  a  mistrust  of  the  left  wing,  of 
the  **  enthusiasts,"  induced  the  Churches  to  offer 
an  energetic  resistance  to  tendencies  which  they 
could  have  accompanied  for  a  good  bit  of  their  way. 
Luther's  unwillingness  to  have  anything  to  do  with 
them,  nay,  the  manner  in  which  he  became  sus- 
picious of  his  own  ideas  when  they  coincided  with 
those  of  the  **  enthusiasts,"  was  bitterly  avenged 
and  came  home  to  the  evangelical  Churches  in  the 
Age  of  Enlightenment.  Even  at  the  risk  of  being 
reckoned  among  Luther's  detractors,  we  must  go 
further.  This  genius  had  a  faith  as  robust  as  Paul's, 
and  thereby  an  immense  power  over  the  minds  and 
hearts  of  men ;  but  he  was  not  abreast  of  the  know- 
ledge accessible  even  in  his  own  time.  The  naive 
age  had  gone  by ;  it  was  an  age  of  deep  feeling,  of 
progress,  an  age  in  which  religion  could  not  avoid 
contact  with  all  the  powers  of  mind.  In  this  age  it 
was  his  destiny  to  be  forced  to  be  not  only  a  re- 
former but  also  an  intellectual  and  spiritual  leader 
and  teacher.  The  way  of  looking  at  the  world  and 
at  history  he  had  to  plan  afresh  for  generations ;  for 
there  was  no  one  there  to  help  him,  and  to  no  one 
else  would  people  listen.  But  he  had  not  all  the  re- 
sources of  clear  knowledge  at  his  command.  Lastly, 
he  was  always  anxious  to  go  back  to  the  original, 
to  the  Gospel  itself,  and,  so  far  as  it  was  possible  to 
do  it  by  intuition  and  inward  experience,  he  did  it; 


Protestantism  3 1 1 

moreover,  he  made  some  admirable  studies  in  his- 
tory, and  in  many  places  broke  victoriously  through 
the  serried  lines  of  the  traditional  dogmas.  But  any 
trustworthy  knowledge  of  the  history  of  those  dog- 
mas was  as  yet  an  impossibility,  and  still  less  was 
any  historical  acquaintance  with  the  New  Testament 
and  primitive  Christianity  attainable.  It  is  marvel- 
lous how,  in  spite  of  all  this,  Luther  possessed  so 
much  power  of  penetration  and  sound  judgment. 
We  have  only  to  look  at  his  introductions  to  the 
books  of  the  New  Testament,  or  at  his  treatise  on 
"  Churches  and  Councils."  But  there  were  count- 
less problems  of  which  he  did  not  even  know,  to  say 
nothing  of  being  able  to  solve  them ;  and  so  it  was 
that  he  had  no  means  of  distinguishing  between 
kernel  and  husk,  between  what  was  original  and 
what  was  of  alien  growth.  How  can  we  be  sur- 
prised, then,  if  in  its  doctrine,  and  in  the  view  which 
it  took  of  history,  the  Reformation  was  far  from  be- 
ing a  finished  product;  and  that,  where  it  perceived 
no  problems,  confusion  in  its  own  ideas  was  inevita- 
ble ?  It  could  not,  like  Pallas  Athene,  spring  com- 
plete from  Jupiter's  head;  as  doctrine  it  could  do 
no  more  than  mark  a  bcginningy  and  it  had  to  reckon 
on  future  development.  But  by  being  rapidly 
formed  into  national  Churches  it  came  near  to  itself 
cutting  short  its  further  development  for  all  time. 
As  regards  the  confusion  and  the  checks  which  it 


312  What  is  Christianity? 

brought  upon  itself,  we  must  content  ourselves  with 
referring  to  a  few  leading  points.  Firstly,  Luther 
would  admit  nothing  but  the  Gospel,  nothing  but 
what  frees  and  binds  the  consciences  of  men,  what 
everyone,  down  to  the  man-servant  and  the  maid- 
servant, can  understand.  But  then  he  not  only  took 
the  old  dogmas  of  the  Trinity  and  the  two  natures  as 
part  of  the  Gospel — he  was  not  in  a  position  to  ex- 
amine them  historically — and  even  framed  new  ones, 
but  he  was  absolutely  incapable  of  making  any  sound 
distinction  between  "  doctrine  "  and  Gospel;  in  this 
respect  falling  far  behind  Paul.  The  necessary  re- 
sult was  that  intellectualism  was  still  in  the  ascend- 
ant ;  that  a  scholastic  doctrine  was  again  set  up  as 
necessary  to  salvation ;  and  that  two  classes  of 
Christians  once  more  arose :  those  who  understand 
the  doctrine,  and  the  minors  who  are  dependent  on 
the  others'  understanding  of  it. 

Secondly,  Lulher  was  convinced  that  that  alone 
is  the  **  Word  of  God  "  whereby  a  man  is  inwardly 
born  anew — the  message  of  the  free  grace  of  God  in 
Christ.  At  the  highest  levels  to  which  he  attained 
in  his  life  he  was  free  from  every  sort  of  bondage  to 
the  letter.  What  a  capacity  he  had  for  distinguish- 
ing between  law  and  Gospel,  between  Old  and  New 
Testament,  nay,  for  distinguishing  in  the  New 
Testament  itself!  All  that  he  would  recognise  was 
the  kernel  of  the  matter,  clearly  revealed  as  it  is  in 


Protestantism  313 

these  books,  and  proving  its  power  by  its  effect  on 
the  soul.  But  he  did  not  make  a  clean  sweep.  In 
cases  where  he  had  found  the  letter  important,  he 
demanded  submission  to  the  **  it  is  written  ";  and 
he  demanded  it  peremptorily,  without  recollecting 
that,  where  other  sayings  of  the  Scriptures  were 
concerned,  he  himself  had. declared  the  "it  is  writ- 
ten "  to  be  of  no  binding  force. 

Thirdly,  grace  is  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and 
therefore  the  assurance  of  possessing  a  God  of  grace, 
and  life,  and  salvation.  How  often  Luther  repeated 
this,  always  with  the  addition  that  what  was  effica- 
cious here  was  the  Word — that  union  of  the  soul 
with  God  in  the  trust  and  childlike  reverence  which 
God's  Word  inspires;  it  was  a  personal  relation 
which  was  here  involved.  But  the  same  man  al- 
lowed himself  to  be  inveigled  into  the  most  painful 
controversies  about  the  means  of  grace,  about  com- 
munion and  infant  baptism.  These  were  struggles 
in  which  he  ran  the  risk  of  again  exchanging  his 
high  conception  of  grace  for  the  Catholic  concep- 
tion, as  well  as  of  sacrificing  the  fundamental  idea 
that  it  is  a  purely  spiritual  possession  that  is  in 
question,  and  that,  compared  with  Word  and  faith, 
all  else  is  of  no  importance.  What  he  here  be- 
queathed to  his  Church  has  become  a  legacy  of  woe. 

Fourthly,  the  counter-Church  which,  as  was  in- 
evitable, rapidly  arose  in  opposition  to  the  Roman 


SH  What  is  Christianity? 

Church,  and,  under  the  pressure  which  that  Church 
exercised,  perceived,  not  without  reason,  that  its 
truth  and  its  title  lay  in  the  re-establishment  of  the 
Gospel.  But  whilst  the  counter-Church  privily 
identified  the  sum  and  substance  of  its  doctrine  with 
the  Gospel,  the  thought  also  stole  in  surreptitiously  : 
We — that  is  to  say,  the  particular  Churches  which 
had  now  sprung  up — are  the  true  Church.  Luther, 
of  course,  was  never  able  to  forget  that  the  true 
Church  was  the  sacred  community  of  the  faithful ; 
but  still  he  had  no  clear  ideas  as  to  the  relation  be- 
tween it  and  the  visible  new  Church  which  had  now 
arisen,  and  subsequent  generations  settled  down 
more  and  more  into  the  sad  misunderstanding:  We 
are  the  true  Church  because  we  have  the  right  "doc- 
trine.'* This  misunderstanding,  besides  giving  rise 
to  evil  results  in  self-infatuation  and  intolerance, 
still  further  strengthened  that  mischievous  distinc- 
tion between  theologians  and  clergy  on  the  one 
side,  and  the  laity  on  the  other,  on  which  we  have 
already  dwelt.  Not,  perhaps,  in  theory,  but  cer- 
tainly in  practice,  a  double  form  of  Christianity 
arose,  just  as  in  Catholicism ;  and  in  spite  of  the 
efforts  of  the  Pietistic  movement  it  still  remains 
with  us  to-day.  The  theologian  and  the  clergy- 
man must  defend  the  whole  doctrine,  and  be  ortho- 
dox: for  the  layman  it  suffices  if  he  adheres  to 
certain  leading  points  and  refrains  from  attacking 


Protestantism  3 1 5 

the  orthodox  creed.  A  very  well-known  man,  as  I 
have  been  lately  told,  expressed  the  wish  that  a 
certain  inconvenient  theologian  would  go  over  to 
the  philosophical  faculty;  **  for  then,"  he  said, 
"  instead  of  an  unbelieving  theologian  we  should 
have  a  believing  philosopher."  Here  we  have  the 
logical  outcome  of  the  contention  that  in  the  evan- 
gelical Churches,  too,  doctrine  is  something  laid 
down  for  all  time,  and  that  in  spite  of  being  gener- 
ally binding  it  is  a  matter  of  so  much  difificulty  that 
the  laity  need  not  be  expected  to  defend  it.  But 
if  we  persist  on  this  path,  and  other  confusions  be- 
come worse  confounded  and  take  firmer  root,  there 
is  a  risk  of  Protestantism  becoming  a  sorry  double 
of  Catholicism.  I  say  a  sorry  double,  because  there 
are  two  things  which  Protestantism  will  never  ob- 
tain, namely,  a  pope  and  monastic  priests.  Neither 
the  letter  of  the  Bible  nor  any  belief  embodied  in 
creeds  can  ever  produce  the  unconditional  authority 
which  Catholics  possess  in  the  Pope ;  and  Protest- 
antism cannot  now  return  to  the  monastic  priest. 
It  retains  its  national  Churches  and  its  married 
clergy,  neither  of  which  looks  very  stately  by  the 
side  of  Catholicism,  if  competition  with  Catholicism 
is  what  the  evangelical  Churches  desire. 

Gentlemen,  Protestantism  is  not  yet,  thank  God, 
in  such  a  bad  way  that  the  imperfections  and  con- 
fusions in  which  it  began  have  got  the  upper  hand 


3i6  What  is  Christianity  ? 

and  entirely  stunted  or  stifled  its  true  character. 
Even  those  among  us  who  are  convinced  that  the 
Reformation  in  the  sixteenth  century  is  something 
that  is  over  and  done  with  are  by  no  means  ready 
to  abandon  the  momentous  ideas  on  which  it  was 
based,  and  there  is  a  large  field  in  which  all  earnest 
evangelical  Christians  are  in  complete  unanimity. 
But  if  those  who  think  that  the  Reformation  is 
done  with  cannot  see  that  its  continuance  in  the 
sense  of  a  pure  understanding  of  God's  Word  is  a 
question  of  life  and  death  for  Protestantism — its 
continuance  has  already  borne  abundant  fruit  in  as- 
sociations like  the  Evangelical  Union  —  let  them  at 
least  promote  the  liberty  for  which  Luther  fought 
in  his  best  days:  "  Let  the  minds  of  men  rush  one 
against  another  and  strike;  if  some  are  meanwhile 
led  astray — well !  that  is  what  we  must  expect  in 
war;  where  there  is  battle  and  slaughter,  some 
must  fall  and  be  wounded,  but  whoso  fights  honestly 
will  receive  the  crown." 

The  reason  why  the  catholicising  of  the  Protest- 
ant Churches — I  do  not  mean  that  they  are  becom- 
ing papal ;  I  mean  that  they  are  becoming  Churches 
of  ordinance,  doctrine,  and  ceremony — is  so  burning 
a  question  is  that  three  powerful  forces  are  working 
together  to  further  this  development.  First  there 
is  the  indifference  of  the  masses.  The  tendency  of 
all  indifference  is  to  put  religion  on  the  same  plane 


Protestantism  317 

not  only  with  authority  and  tradition,  but  also  with 
priests,  hierarchies,  and  the  cult  of  ceremonies.  It 
puts  religion  there,  and  then  goes  on  to  complain  of 
the  external  character  and  stationary  condition  of 
religion,  and  of  the  '*  pretensions  "  of  the  clergy; 
nay,  it  is  capable,  apparently,  at  one  and  the  same 
moment,  of  mingling  those  complaints  with  abuse, 
of  contemptuously  jeering  at  every  active  expres- 
sion of  religious  feeling,  and  doing  homage  to  every 
kind  of  ceremony.  This  kind  of  indifference  has 
no  understanding  whatever  for  evangelical  Christ- 
ianity, instinctively  tries  to  suppress  it,  and  praises 
Catholicism  at  its  expense.  The  second  of  the 
forces  to  be  taken  into  consideration  is  what  I  may 
call  **  natural  religion."  Those  who  live  by  fear 
and  hope;  whose  chief  endeavour  is  to  find  some 
authority  in  matters  of  religion ;  who  are  eager  to 
be  rid  of  their  own  responsibility  and  want  to  be 
reassured;  who  are  looking  for  some  **  adjunct  "  to 
life,  whether  in  its  solemn  hours  or  in  its  worst  dis- 
tress, some  aesthetic  transfiguration,  or  some  violent 
form  of  assistance  till  time  itself  assists — all  these 
people  are  also,  without  being  aware  of  it,  putting 
religion  on  the  Catholic  plane;  they  want  "  some- 
thing that  they  can  lean  upon,"  and  a  good  deal 
else,  too — all  kinds  of  things  to  stir  them  up  and 
help  them ;  but  they  do  not  want  the  Christianity 
of  the  Gospel.     But  the  Christianity  of  the  Gospel 


3i8  What  is  Christianity? 

in  yielding  to  such  demands  becomes  Catholic 
Christianity.  The  third  force  I  mention  unwill- 
ingly, and  yet  I  cannot  pass  it  over  in  silence ;  it  is 
the  State.  We  must  not  blame  the  state  for  setting 
chief  store  by  the  conservative  influence  which  re- 
ligion and  the  Churches  exercise,  and  the  subsidiary 
effects  which  they  produce  in  respect  of  reverence, 
obedience,  and  public  order.  But  this  is  just  the 
reason  why  the  state  exercises  pressure  in  this 
direction,  protects  all  the  elements  of  stability  in 
the  Churches,  and  seeks  to  keep  them  from  every 
inner  movement  that  would  call  their  unity  and 
their  "public  utility"  in  question;  nay,  it  has 
tried  often  enough  to  approximate  the  Church  to 
the  police,  and  employ  it  as  a  means  of  maintaining 
order  in  the  state.  We  can  pardon  this  —  let  the 
state  take  the  means  of  power  wherever  it  can 
find  them ;  but  the  Church  must  not  allow  itself  to 
be  made  into  a  pliant  instrument ;  for,  side  by  side 
with  all  the  desolating  consequences  to  its  vocation 
and  prestige,  it  would  thereby  become  an  outward 
institution  in  which  public  order  is  of  greater  conse- 
quence than  the  spirit,  form  more  important  than 
matter,  and  obedience  of  higher  value  than  truth. 

In  the  face  of  these  three  so  different  forces, 
what  we  have  to  do  is  to  maintain  Christian  earnest- 
ness and  liberty  as  presented  in  the  Gospel.  Theo- 
logy alone  is  unavailing;  what  is  wanted  is  firmness 


Protestantism  319 

of  Christian  character.  The  evangelical  Churches 
will  be  pushed  into  the  background  if  they  do  not 
make  a  stand.  It  was  out  of  such  free  creations  as 
the  Pauline  communities  were  that  the  Catholic 
Church  once  arose.  Who  can  guarantee  that  those 
Churches,  too,  will  not  become  "  Catholic"  which 
had  their  origin  in  '*  the  liberty  of  a  Christian 
man"  ? 

That,  however,  would  not  involve  the  destruction 
of  the  Gospel :  so  much,  at  least,  history  proves. 
It  would  be  still  traceable,  like  a  red  thread  in  the 
centre  of  the  web,  and  somewhere  or  other  it  would 
emerge  afresh,  and  free  itself  from  its  entangling 
connexions.  Even  in  the  outwardly  decorated  but 
inwardly  decayed  temples  of  the  Greek  and  Roman 
Churches  it  has  not  been  effaced.  **  Venture  on- 
wards! deep  down  in  a  vault  you  will  still  find 
the  altar  and  its  sacred,  ever-burning  lamp !  "  This 
Gospel,  associated  as  it  was  with  the  speculative 
ideas  and  the  mystery-worship  of  the  Greeks,  yet 
did  not  perish  in  them ;  united  with  the  Roman 
Empire,  it  held  its  own  even  in  this  fusion,  nay,  out 
of  it  gave  birth  to  the  Reformation.  Its  dogmatic 
doctrines,  its  ordinances  of  public  worship,  have 
changed ;  nay,  what  is  much  more,  it  has  been  em- 
braced by  the  simplest  and  purest  minds  and  by  the 
greatest  thinkers ;  it  endeared  itself  to  a  St.  Francis 
and  to  a  Newton.     It  has  outlived  all  the  changing 


320  What  is  Christianity  ? 

philosophies  of  the  world ;  it  has  cast  off  like  a  gar- 
ment forms  and  ideas  which  were  once  sacred ;  it 
has  participated  in  the  entire  progress  of  civilisa- 
tion ;  it  has  become  spiritualised,  and  in  the  course 
of  history  it  has  learnt  how  to  make  a  surer  appli- 
cation of  its  ethical  principles.  In  its  original 
earnestness  and  in  the  consolation  which  it  offers, 
it  has  come  home  to  thousands  in  all  ages ;  and  in 
all  ages,  too,  it  has  thrown  ofl  all  its  encumbrances, 
and  broken  down  all  barriers.  If  we  were  right  in 
saying  that  the  Gospel  is  the  knowledge  and  recog- 
nition of  God  as  the  Father,  the  certainty  of  re- 
demption, humility  and  joy  in  God,  energy  and 
brotherly  love;  if  it  is  essential  to  this  religion  that 
the  founder  must  not  be  forgotten  over  his  message, 
nor  the  message  over  the  founder,  history  shows  us 
that  the  Gospel  has,  in  point  of  fact,  remained  in 
force,  struggling  again  and  again  to  the  surface. 

You  will  perhaps  have  felt  that  I  have  not 
entered  into  present  questions,  the  relation,  namely, 
of  the  Gospel  to  our  present  intellectual  condition, 
our  whole  knowledge  of  the  world,  and  our  task 
therein.  But  to  do  this  with  any  success  in  regard 
to  the  actual  situation  of  affairs  would  require 
longer  than  a  few  fleeting  hours.  As  regards  the 
kernel  of  the  matter,  however,  I  have  said  all  that 
is  needful,  for  no  new  phase  in  the  history  of  the 


Religion  321 

Christian  religion  has  occurred  since  the  Reform- 
ation. Our  knowledge  of  the  world  has  undergone 
enormous  changes  —  every  century  since  the  Re- 
formation marks  an  advance,  the  most  important 
being  those  in  the  last  two ;  but,  looked  at  from  a 
religious  and  ethical  point  of  view,  the  forces  and 
principles  of  the  Reformation  have  not  been  outrun 
or  rendered  obsolete.  We  need  only  grasp  them  in 
their  purity  and  courageously  apply  them,  modern 
ideas  will  not  put  any  Jicw  difficulties  in  their  way. 
The  real  difficulties  in  the  way  of  the  religion  of  the 
Gospel  remain  the  old  ones.  In  face  of  them  we 
can  **  prove"  nothing,  for  our  proofs  are  only  varia- 
tions of  our  convictions.  But  the  course  which 
history  has  taken  has  surely  opened  up  a  wide  pro- 
vince, in  which  the  Christian  sense  of  brotherhood 
must  give  practical  proof  of  itself  quite  otherwise 
than  it  knew  how,  or  was  able,  to  do  in  the  early 
centuries  —  I  mean  the  social  province.  Here  a 
tremendous  task  confronts  us,  and  in  the  measure 
in  which  we  accomplish  it  shall  we  be  able  to  answer 
with  a  better  heart  the  deepest  of  all  questions — the 
question  of  the  meaning  of  life. 

Gentlemen,  it  is  religion,  the  love  of  God  and 
neighbour,  which  gives  life  a  meaning;  knowledge 
cannot  do  it.  Let  me,  if  you  please,  speak  of  my 
own  experience,  as  one   who   for  thirty  years  has 


322  What  is  Christianity  ? 

taken  an  earnest  interest  in  these  things.  Pure 
knowledge  is  a  glorious  thing,  and  woe  to  the  man 
who  holds  it  light  or  blunts  his  sense  for  it!  But 
to  the  question,  Whence,  whither,  and  to  what  pur- 
pose? it  gives  an  answer  to-day  as  little  as  it  did  two 
or  three  thousand  years  ago.  It  does,  indeed,  in- 
struct us  in  facts;  it  detects  inconsistencies;  it  links 
phenomena;  it  corrects  the  deceptions  of  sense  and 
idea.  But  where  and  how  the  curve  of  the  world 
and  the  curve  of  our  own  life  begin, —  that  curve  of 
which  it  shows  us  only  a  section, — and  whither  this 
curve  leads,  knowledge  does  not  tell  us.  But  if  with 
a  steady  will  we  affirm  the  forces  and  the  standards 
which  on  the  summits  of  our  inner  life  shine  out  as 
our  highest  good,  nay,  as  our  real  self;  if  we  are 
earnest  and  courageous  enough  to  accept  them  as  the 
great  Reality  and  direct  our  lives  by  them  ;  and  if  we 
then  look  at  the  course  of  mankind's  history,  follow 
its  upward  development,  and  search,  in  strenuous 
and  patient  service,  for  the  communion  of  minds  in 
it,  we  shall  not  faint  in  weariness  and  despair,  but 
become  certain  of  God,  of  the  God  whom  Jesus 
Christ  called  his  Father,  and  who  is  also  our 
Father. 

THE   END. 


Recent   Publications. 

CHRISTIANITY  AND  ANTI=CHRISTIANJTY  IN  THEIR  FINAL 
CONFLICT.  By  Samuel  J.  Andrews,  author  of  "The  Life  of 
Our  Lord  upon  Earth,"  etc.     S° $2  oo 

"  This  is  in  many  respects  a  remarkable  book.  It  deals  with  the  important  Bible 
truths,  of  which  little  has  been  heard  of  late.  The  same  scholarly  breadth  and  thorough- 
ness which  characterize  the  author's  'Life  of  Christ'  are  stamped  also  on  this  work. 
.     .    .     The  book  deserves  a  thoughtful  reading  by  all  Christians.' —ZA^  Observer. 


HEROES  OF  THE   REFORMATION. 

A  series  of  biographies  cf  the  leaders  in  the  Protestant  Reformation,  men 
who,  while  differing  in  their  gifts,  were  influenced  by  the  same  spirit. 
The  series  is  edited  by  Samuel  Macauley  Jackson,  D.D.,  LL.D,, 
Professor  of  Church  History,  New  York  University.  Each  fully 
illustrated.     12° $1   50 

I.— MARTIN  LUTHER,  The  Hero  of  the  Reformation.  By  Henry 
E.  Jacobs,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Theology,  Evangelical  Lu- 
theran Seminary,  Philadelphia. 

2.— PHILIP  MELANCHTHON,  The  Protestant  Preceptor  of  Germany. 
By  James  W.  Richard,  Professor  of  Homiletics,  Lutheran  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  Gettysburg,  Pa. 

3.— DESIDERIUS  ERASMUS,  of  Rotterdam,  the  Humanist  in  the 
Service  of  the  Reformation.  By  Ephraim  Emerton,  Ph.D.,  Pro- 
fessor of  Ecclesiastical  History,  Harvard  University. 

4.— THEODORE  BEZA,  the'  Counsellor  of  the  French  Reformation. 
By  Henry  Martyn  Baird,  Ph.D.,  Professor  of  the  Greek  Language 
and  Literature,  New  York  University;  author  of  "The  Huguenots," 
6  vols. 

For  titles  of  volumes  in  preparation,  write  for  separate  descriptive  circular. 

THE  AMERICAN  LECTURES  ON  THE  HISTORY  OF 
RELIGIONS. 

Each,  8°,  $1  50. 

I.— BUDDHISM:  ITS  HISTORY  AND  LITERATURE.     By  T.  W. 

Rhys-Davids,  LL.D.,  Ph.D.,  Chairman  of  the  Pali  Text  Society; 
Secretary  and  Librarian  of  the  Royal  Asiatic  Society;  Professor  of 
Pali  and  Buddhist  Literature  at  University  College,  London. 

2.— RELIGIONS  OF  PRIMITIVE  PEOPLES.  By  Daniel  G.  Brin- 
TON,  A.M.,  M.D.,  LL.D.,  D.Sc,  Professor  of  Archaeology  and 
Linguistics  in  the  University  of  Pennsylvania. 

3.— JEWISH  RELIGIOUS  LIFE  AFTER  THE  EXILE.     By  T.  K. 

Cheyne,  of  University  of  Oxford. 

4.— THE  RELIGION  OF  ISRAEL  TO  THE  EXILE.  By  Karl 
BUDDE,  of  the  University  of  Strasburg,  Germany. 


G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS,  New  York  and  London. 


By  Minot  J.  Savage 

LIFE  BEYOND  DEATH. 

Being  a  Review  of  the  World's  Beliefs  on  the  subject,  ft 
Consideration  of  Present  Conditions  of  Thought  and  Feeling, 
Leading  to  the  Question  as  to  whether  it  can  be  Demon- 
strated as  a  Fact.  To  which  is  added  an  Appendix  Containing 
Some  Hints  as  to  Personal  Experiences  and  Opinions.  8°, 
pp.  342 $1.50 

"  The  book  is  one  that  everj'one  can  and  ought  to  read.  There  are  no 
technicalities  of  style  to  offer  an  excuse  for  passing  it  by.  No  unintel- 
ligible philosophy  or  speculative  formulas  lie  at  the  bottom  of  the  discus- 
sion. It  is  all  in  plain  English.  Dr.  Savage  has  the  excellent  knack  of 
putting  profound  problems  into  every-day  language.  He  states  the  issues 
and  dilemmas  of  present  thought  with  remarkable  clearness,  and  with  as 
much  boldness  as  clearness,  challenging  every  mental  temper  except  cour- 
age and  intelligent  thinking.  These  are  rare  qualities,  and  ought  to  give 
the  work  a  wide  reading  even  among  those  who  are  not  prepared  to  fol- 
low its  sympathies." — Professor  James  H.  Hvslop,  in  The  Christian 
Re^ster. 

THE  PASSING   AND  THE    PERMANENT   IN 
RELIGION. 

Uniform  with  "  Life  Beyond  Death."     8°          .         $1.35  net 
By  mail $1.50 

"Dr.  Savage  devotes  the  first  chapter  to  pointing  out  the  accidental  and 
the  permanent  in  religion.  Truth,  love  and  service  are  what  all  religions 
have  striven  for,  and  are,  consequently,  the  permanent  religious  ideals. 
In  the  chapter  on  Theologies  and  Theology  it  is  shown  that  theologj',  like 
religion,  abides,  but  that  theologies,  like  religions,  pass  away.  '  So  long 
as  man  feels  and  loves,  he  will  be  religious ;  so  long  as  he  thinks,  he 
will  be  theological.'  The  universe  is  progressive  and  intelligent,  and  re- 
ligion and  life  are  one,  at  the  heart  of  the  world,  Man  is,  as  Darwin 
says,  the  result  of  evolution,  which  process,  however,  is  destined  to  carry 
him  on  to  his  ideal,  which  is  the  likeness  of  God,  An  interesting  chapter 
is  that  on  the  different  hells  imagined  by  man,  and  the  lines  of  Omar,  as 
giving  a  poetic  idea  of  the  true  nature  of  hell,  are  quoted  : 

Heaven  but  the  vision  of  fulfilled  desire. 

And  hell  the  shadow  of  a  soul  on  fire," 

Commercial  A  dvf-  viisevt 

Q.  P.  PUTNAfl'S  SONS 

NEW  YORK  LONDON 


